MRS. SATWANT KAUR Vs. MR. SUKHWINDER SINGH BAWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 06.02.2013 (Annexure P -1) passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh whereby application under Order 32 Rule 15 of the CPC has been dismissed and further for setting aside the order dated 27.02.2013 (Annexure P -2) passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh whereby evidence of the petitioner -wife has been closed by Court order. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts relevant for disposal of the present petition are to the effect that the respondent -petitioner filed petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short "the Act") against the petitioner -respondent. It is averred in the petition that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 15.01.1995 according to Sikh rites and ceremonies. From the said wedlock, two children i.e. Sejal Bawa (daughter) and Raj Angad Bawa (son) have born. The respondent -husband has filed divorce petition seeking divorce on the ground of mental cruelty. In the said petition, the present petitioner filed application dated 27.11.2012 under Order 32 Rule 15 of the CPC for initiating proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the said Order. In reply to the said application, the respondent alleged that the petitioner was using delaying tactics and she is of sound mind. After considering the facts, the learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh dismissed the said application vide impugned order dated 6.2.2013 by observing that the petitioner was adopting tactics to delay the matter. Since the petitioner is of sound mind and permission under Order 32 Rule 15 of CPC was not given, yet she could not be produced in Court, therefore, on 27.02.2013, the learned trial Court closed the evidence of the present petitioner by order. Hence, this revision.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner -wife has contended that the petitioner is suffering from mental infirmity and she is getting treatment for the said ailment. The learned counsel has further contended that the father of petitioner also moved an application before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh with the request that her daughter be sent to GMCH, Sector 32, Chandigarh as she is patient of psychiatry. The learned counsel has further contended that father of the petitioner is ready to get her examined from PGI, Chandigarh to prove her mental condition. The learned counsel has further contended that she is taking Homoeopathic treatment regarding her mental health. There is cogent evidence on the file before the learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh that she is mentally ill.