DATTATRAY SALVI Vs. CHARU DATTATRAY SALVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (ORAL) - Heard.

(2.) Admit. By consent of parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage.

(3.) The appellant-original respondent-husband before the Family Court is objecting to the Judgment and Decree passed in Petition No. A-869 of 2013 decided on 24th April, 2015. The Petition before the Family Court, Mumbai at Bandra was presented by the Respondent-wife praying for grant of decree of dissolution of marriage under Sec. 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act " for short). The respondent herein has also prayed for grant of several other reliefs in the petition presented to the Family Court. It is recorded in the judgment that the Respondent did not press prayer clause (b) to (d) and (f) to (l) incorporated in the Hindu Marriage Petition. The Family Court as such considered the only prayer clause (e) in respect of issuance of direction to the appellant-husband herein to pay a sum of Rs. 2,21,400.00 to the respondent-wife with interest at 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. till 11th March, 2013. It is the case of the Respondent-wife that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 21st Jan., 1992. There are two daughters born to the couple by name Rutuja and Namrata born on 26th July, 1995 and 22nd April, 1997 respectively. The respondent-wife alleges that the appellant-husband during the wedlock treated her badly and as such the respondent-wife prays for grant of decree of divorce under Sec. 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. So far as the refund of amount of Rs. 2,21,400.00 is concerned, it would not be necessary to go into factual details recorded in the petition as well as the consideration thereof by the learned Judge of the Family Court since the decree passed by the Family Court is not sustainable in law and matter deserves to be remitted back. It is the contention of the appellant-husband that so far the decree passed by the Family Court relating to directions to the appellant herein to pay a sum of Rs.2,21,400.00 is concerned, there is non-consideration of material evidence in the form of documents placed on record. It is also contended that no proper opportunity has been given to the appellant to oppose the claim of the respondent-wife.