FILOMINA Vs. PETRIC ADMEDIS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE point that has arisen for consideration is as to whether after coming into force the of Family Courts Act, 1984, the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a petition under section 23 of the Indian Divorce Act of 1860

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioner Philomina Bhavi has presented this petition under section 23 of the Indian Divorce for judicial separation and maintenance. The opposite party in spite of notice has not filed any written statement and absented himself on the date of hearing, it is the applicant's counsel himself who raised the point of jurisdiction and wanted to make some submissions about this Court's jurisdiction after the constitution of the Family Court. He was heard and the records have been perused.

(3.) AS said earlier, the petitioner has come to this Court with a petition under section 23 of the Indian Divorce Act alleging that she was married with the non-appiicant according to Christian rites on 18-6-1973 in the city of ratlam in a Ron-an Catholic Church and since then they were living as husband and wife. Her husband treats her with cruelty and does not maintain her and three children who have taken birth after the marriage.