VADALASETTI SAMRAJYAMMA Vs. VADALASETTI NAGAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The husband of the respondent filed OP No. 30/ 86 for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent under S. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 ('the Act', for short). The petition was decreed ex parte on 11-7-1988. The petitioner (respondent?) filed IA No. 870/ 88 to set aside the ex parte decree. Subsequently, the husband of the respondent died on 11-2-1989, leaving behind his mother, the petitioner herein, as the only heir. The respondent filed IA No. 712/89 under O.22, R.4(c) and S. 151, C.P.C. to implead the petitioner as the legal representative of the deceased in IA No. 870/ 88. The learned Judge allowed the application, giving rise to this revision.

(2.) Sri Y. K. Rayudu, learned counsel for the petitioner firstly contended that proceedings under S. 13 of the Act are personal in nature and they stand abated with the death of one of the spouses and no legal representatives of the deceased can be impleaded for continuing the proceedings. He further submitted that O.22, R.4, C.P.C. is not applicable to the proceedings under the Act.

(3.) Sri Adinarayanarao, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the proceedings under S. 13 of the Act not only involve the personal status of the spouses, but also the marital status of the surviving party, including the right to inherent the property of the deceased and hence, the legal representative of the deceased can be brought on record and the proceedings can be continued. He further contended that the judgment rendered under S. 13 of the Act is a judgment in rem and not a judgment in personem and the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, including O.22, R, 4, are applicable to the proceedings under the Act.