MARY G SUNNY Vs. SUNNY GEORGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT. Mary G. Sunny (38) filed an application under Sections 10/22, Indian Divorce Act, 1869, alleging cruelly on the part of Sunny George (40 ). Marriage took place on November 27, 1989 at St. Mary's Orthodox Church, Edanad, Distt. Alleppey, Kerala, according to prevalent Christian Marriage rites and customs. Although the District Judge, Bhopal tried the matter, respondent did not appear to contest the application. Consequently, same has been allowed by order dated February 22, 2000. Decree for divorce has been passed. However, in terms of Section 17 of the Act, it is referred to this Court for confirmation.

(2.) DURING the course of hearing, it was found that the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (4 of 1869) has been amended by the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001. Sub-section (2) of Section 1 of the amended Act provides for coming into force of Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001 on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. Notification by Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs (Legislative Department), dated October 3, 2001, published in the Gazette of India (Extra-ordinary) Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (2) appoints 3rd day of October, 2001, as the date on which the Act comes into force.

(3.) THE result is that the High Court loses jurisdiction under Section 17 of the Act for confirmation of the order passed by the District Judge, under Sections 10/22 of the Act. The question is whether the amendment would apply to pending proceedings. The question should not detain us for long since Section 10 of the amended Act, 2001 provides for dissolution of marriage solemnized before or after the commencement of the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001 on a petition presented to the District Court either by the husband or the wife, on any ground mentioned therein. Under the old provision, the decree for divorce could be sought on proof of adultery with cruelty otherwise for cruelty alone judicial separation could be ordered (see : Prem Prakash Rubin v. Sarla Rubin, 1989 MPLJ 571), but Amendment Act gives right to the spouse to seek divorce on the ground that he/she had been treated with such cruelty as to cause reasonable apprehension in his/her mind that it would be harmful or injurious for him/her to live with other. The order passed by the District Judge has no force till it is confirmed by the High Court under the old Act, therefore, proceedings are taken to be pending on commencement of the Amendment Act, 2001.