PASCAL @ PASCO KINNY Vs. CILINA SYBIL KINNY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS suit for divorce has been filed by the petitioner/husband Under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act. Notice has been served upon the respondent and co -respondent. Though served, none of them cared to remain present before the Court. Affidavit proving service has been filed.

(2.) IN view of the fact that respondent and co -respondent have, despite service, not cared to file any reply nor engaged any Advocate to represent them, the matter was placed on Board for ex -parte. Even today when the matter was called out, neither the respondent nor co -respondent was present in the Court nor represented by any Advocate. Hearing of the petition is, therefore, proceeded ex parte.

(3.) THE evidence of the petitioner further reveals that in April, 1986, he returned home early at about 3.00 p.m. and was shocked to find the respondent and co -respondent in a compromising situation. The petitioner was annoyed and tried to catch hold of said Shaukat but he ran away and then die respondent was taken to task by petitioner chasing her out of the house but she also ran away to her father's place at Pahchghar, Manori.