SARAT KUMAR Vs. SABITA MISRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision arises out of an order refusing the petitioner to adduce evidence in this case in view of an earlier order of this Court in Civil Revision No. 1 of 1989 which reads as follows :-

(2.) This is a proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce. During the trial, the petitioner who was the appellant filed an application that the respondent wife having alleged that the petitioner lives in adultery, is to lead evidence first. Trial Court allowed the said petition. Against the said order, Civil Revision No. 1 of 1982 was filed by the wife respondent in which the aforesaid order has been passed. Basing on the said order, the trial court has passed the impugned order not permitting the petitioner to adduce evidence when he sought for the same.

(3.) In spite of the service being held to be sufficient, wife respondent has not entered appearance. Mr. Misra, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order itself would indicate that the petitioner never stated either in the trial Court or in the High Court that he would not adduce evidence. His application that the respondent wife should adduce evidence first having been allowed, the matter was carried in civil revision where this Court held that in case the petitioner has no evidence to lead, the respondent would also lead no evidence. In the circumstances, it would be held that the trial Court may proceed to dispose of the proceeding without any evidence from the parties. It is true that the learned counsel for the petitioner agreed that the same would be the position. However, once the petitioner comes forward to adduce evidence, interest of justice demands that the proceeding should be completed after contest and is not to be closed by these technicalities.