VISHAL BAJAJ Vs. KARISHMA KATHPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant -husband is before us, challenging order dated 10.07.2015, dismissing his petition for grant of a divorce by mutual consent.

(2.) COUNSEL for the parties, accompanied by the parties, namely, Vishal Bajaj and Karishma Kathpal, submit that parties had resolved their differences and filed a petition, under Section 13 -B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1955 Act'). However, at the stage of second motion, the respondent refused to make a statement, but has now agreed to make a statement. Counsel for the parties and the parties, who are present in person, pray that statements of parties may be recorded, in second motion. Counsel for the parties also point out that as statement by Vishal Bajaj in second motion has already been recorded before the trial Court, his statement may be read as his statement in second motion and the statement of respondent -Karishma Kathpal may alone be recorded.

(3.) THE parties were married 29.04.2013, at Jalandhar. After their marriage, they lived together at Jalandhar, but on account of matrimonial differences, the appellant's father lodged FIR No. 85, dated 19.05.2013, under Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code, Division No. 4, Jalandhar, against the respondent. The respondent lodged FIR No. 86, dated 19.05.2013, under Section 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Division No. 4, Jalandhar against the appellant and his father. The appellant then lodged FIR No. 27, dated 05.03.2014, under Sections 307, 323, 34 IPC against Har Kishori Lal, Chinaki Kathpal, Reetu Kathpal, Grover Pardya Wala, as well as some unknown persons, at Police Station Division No. 4, Jalandhar.