KAILASH BHANSALI Vs. SURENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Smt. Kailash Bhansali is wife of respondent Shri Surendra Kumar. She has challenged in this petition the impugned order dated 23-3-2000 (Annex.5) passed by the learned Judge of Family Court. Udaipur, whereby, he not only allowed the application dated 29-12-1999 filed by the respondent husband to plead his case through the lawyer of his choice Shri Subhash Chandra Sharma, but also granted permission to petitioner-wife to plead her case through the lawyer of her choice though no such request was made by her.

(2.) Respondent husband had earlier filed an application for divorce before the Family Court, Udaipur seeking divorce from his wife present petitioner, which was dismissed on 30-3-1995 by then Judge of Family Court. Thereafter, the petitioner wife filed application under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal right against her husband before the Family Court, Udaipur which was allowed on 26-10-1996 by the then Judge of Family Court (Annex.2). Instead of complying with the orders at Annex. 1 and 2 passed by the Family Court, Udaipur, only with a view to harass the petitioner, the respondent husband filed an application under Sec. 13 (i) (A) (ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Udaipur stating that his wife failed to comply with the decree passed by the Family Court regarding restitution of conjugal right, therefore, decree of divorce be passed in his favour. There is no pleading in this case to this effect, but this fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent Shri Bhatnagar.

(3.) It is nothing but harassment, but unfortunately the learned Judge of Family Court, Udaipur entertained such application and after framing the issues the case was fixed for evidence on 7-6-1999. On that day an application was filed under Order 8 Rule 9 C.P.C. seeking permission to file rejoinder and the case was thereafter adjourned from time to time for recording evidence, but he failed to examine the witnesses in support of his case. The learned Judge of Family Court ought to have appreciated the fact that the respondent husband was indulging in delay tactics, but unfortunately the proceedings went on merrily before the Learned Judge. Thereafter, on 29-12-1999 the respondent husband filed an application before the Family Court simply praying that he wants to engage Shri Subhash Chandra Sharma to plead and appear on his behalf the case pending before the Family Court (Annex. 3). It is a small application in Hindi, which I would like to reproduce, which is as under :-