ASHA RANI Vs. AMRAT LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AMRIT Lal filed petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in the Court of District Judge, Rohtak against his wife Asha Rani for dissolution of the marriage on the ground that she was of unsound mind. She was sued through her brother Gian Chand who engaged a counsel and filed a written statement on her behalf. After trial the learned District Judge Rohtak on 28-21973 holding that Asha Rani has been of incurably unsound mind for three years prior to the presentation of the petition granted a decree for divorce in favour of Amrit Lal respondent. This appeal has been filed on behalf of Asha rani challenging that decree.

(2.) SHRI Roop Chand, learned counsel for the appellant, has argued that the respondent has sought a decree against the appellant on the ground that she is of unsound mind and had been so, even three years, before the presentation of the petition, but at the time of presentation of the petition he did not comply with the provisions of Order XXXII of the Civil Procedure Code (1908) (hereinafter referred to as the Code ). Rule 3 of Order XXXII of the Code which deals with the case of a minor is relevant in this case. In Punjab and Haryana sub-rules (3) and (4) of Rule 3 of Order XXXII of the Code have been substituted and Rules 6 and 1 have been added. Rule 3 of Order XXXII of the code as applicable to the States of Punjab and Haryana is as Under :--" (3) Guardian for the suit to be appointed by Court for minor defendant.

(3.) A study of the language of Rules 3 and 15 of Order XXXII of the Code quoted above makes it manifest that the provisions of Rule 3 of Order XXXII of the code are mandatory and the appointment of a guardian is not a mere formality. The plaintiff in a suit and the petitioner in other proceedings has to furnish list of the relatives of the minor or the person of unsound mind with the plaint or the petition, as the case may be. The Court has to, acting on the application, require the plaintiff or the petitioner to file with the plaint or the petition a list of such persons who can be appointed guardians for a minor defendant or the defendant who is mentally unsound after satisfying itself that the proposed guardian is a fit person to represent the interest of the minor or of the person of unsound mind. The Court has to appoint a guardian ad-litem out of the list, required under Order XXXII, Rule 3 of the Code as applicable in Punjab and haryana, or some other person who has no interest adverse to that of the mentally unsound defendant. In the case in hand no list of the relatives was filed by Amrit Lal as required by Rule 3 of Order XXXII of the Code quoted supra with a request for appointment of a guardian. Even the Court did not ask for any such list from Amrit Lal petitioner. The respondent remained content only by giving the description in the heading of the petition as "smt. Asha Rani daughter of Shri Moti Ram son of Jhangi Ram House No. 25, Barrack No. 25, ward No. 6, Gandhi Nagar, Rohtak, through Shri Gian Chand son of Shri Moti ram as next friend, resident of House No. 25, Barrack No. 25, Ward No. 6, gandhi Nagar, Rohtak. " A report on the summons issued for service on Smt. Asha Rani shows that Gian Chand first refused to accept the service on behalf of the appellant. Later on he filed a written statement through a counsel. With the help of the counsel for the parties I have gone through the interim orders and other parts of the file but I have not been able to find any order appointing Shri gian Chand as the guardian of Asha Rani who was not only alleged by the petitioner-respondent to be a person of unsound mind but was also held to be so by the learned District Judge.