JOSEPH WILLIAM CARROLL Vs. JOSEPH WILLIAM CARROLL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the wife's petition for dissolution of her marriage on the ground of cruelty and adultery of her husband, the respondent. Owing to a number of matters, to which I shall in a moment refer, the case has given me considerable anxiety. Had I thought any advantage would have been gained I should have reserved my judgment. As I have said, the petition is one based on cruelty and adultery.

(2.) The answer by the respondent (para. 4) alleged that the petitioner was living in adultery with one Horace Wilson and otherwise denied the allegations contained in the petition. One of the difficulties, which has arisen in this case, resulted from the procedure which the parties have thought fit to adopt. Section 7, Divorce Act of 1869 lays down that the Courts shall give relief on principles and rules which, in the opinion of the said Courts, are as nearly as may be conformable to the principles and rules on which the Court for Divorce and Matrimonial Causes in England for the time being acts and gives relief.

(3.) Two observations I might make regarding that section in this connection and that is that it is almost impossible to administer the law on principles and rules as laid down by the Divorce Court in England if the parties do not conform to the rules of procedure both under the Civil P.C., which applies to cases under the Divorce Act and to the principles and rules upon which the Court in England acts. I refer in particular on this point-para. 7 of the petition and this brings me to the other point regarding Section 7, Divorce Act. The position in India is at present anomalous. The principles and rules for the time being in the Divorce Court in England are based on the state of the law which does not obtain in India at the present date. Since 1923 a wife petitioner can obtain a dissolution of her marriage on the ground of adultery alone; whereas the law in India in this respect is the same as it was in England prior to 1923.