MALZA D. SHIRA Vs. ARCHANA MARAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NONE appears for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner -husband Shri Malza D. Shira has filed a suit for divorce under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (for short 'the Act'). It is alleged that Smti Archana Marak, the wife of the petitioner and Simon Sangma, had adulterous relations. His wife has deserted him without any justifiable cause. The respondent No. 1, the wife has entered appearance and filed her written statement denying the allegations of adultery and desertion. On the contrary, she has alleged adultery, cruelty and desertion on the part of the husband. She further prayed for return of all the matrimonial properties and maintenance of Rs. 2,000 per month for herself and minor children. The Court below after recording evidence of the parties have reached to the conclusion that both the parties have failed to prove the adultery alleged by them against each other. However, the wife has successfully proved the cruelty and desertion against the petitioner -husband and consequent thereof, the decree of divorce was passed. The Court further directed custody of the minor children with the mother Smti Archana Marak. While passing the decree of divorce, the Court gave further direction regarding the property shown in Annexure -I of the written statement of the Respondent No. 1 holding it to be property of the wife being matrimonial property. The Court has directed that on any matrimonial property, the husband has no right, title and interest as per the customary law applicable to the Garos. Therefore, the property shown in Annexure -I is to be returned back by the petitioner -husband to the wife, i.e., the Respondent No. 1 within a period of one month.

(3.) IT is true that Court below has refused decree of divorce on the allegations made by the petitioner -husband as he has failed to substantiate those allegations, but has granted decree of divorce on the basis of grounds alleged by the wife in her written statement having found them proved by the respondent wife. Miss A. Paul urged that the husband -petitioner having failed to prove the allegations, the Court could have at best dismissed the petition for divorce and has no jurisdiction to pass decree on the basis of allegations made in the written statement. Answer to the question of the counsel lies in Section 15 of the Divorce Act, which reads :