PRATEEK VOHRA Vs. GAUTAM JANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the husband of the 2nd respondent. He filed O.P. No.309 of 2004 in the Family Court at Secunderabad under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, (for short 'the Act') for divorce against the 2nd respondent. Apart from other grounds, he attributed infidelity to the 2nd respondent and made certain allegations. He impleaded the 1st respondent herein as respondent No.2 in the O.P., on the allegation that he had unholy relationship with the 1st respondent. The O.P. is pending.

(2.) The 1st respondent filed I.A.No.955 of 2005 in the Family Court, Secunderabad, under Order 1 Rule 10(2) C.P.C., read with Rule 101 of Civil Rules of Practice. He contended that the petitioner herein impleaded him as the respondent in the O.P., with a mala fide intention and deliberate motive. According to him, the occasion to implead for third party in an O.P., filed under Section 13 of the Act would arose, if only any acts of adultery are attributed by one spouse to the other, in the manner specified in Rule 6(h)(i) of the A.P. High Court Rules, framed under the Hindu Marriage Act, (for short 'the Rules'). He stated that no allegations of adultery were attributed to him, and in that view of the matter, his name is liable to be deleted from the array of parties.

(3.) Petitioner opposed the application by filing a counter-affidavit. The 2nd respondent took exception to the contents of the O.P., as well as the 1st respondent being added as a party. Through its order dated 30-12-2005 the Family Court, allowed the LA. The said order is challenged in this C.R.P.