ARCHANA KUMARI Vs. RAJNISH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The matter was heard on 18.3.2009 and the following order was passed : On 4-3-2009 we heard the matter at length and we found it difficult for the parties to resume their conjugal life. Learned counsel appearing for the parties also expressed the same view. However, in course of argument, it was agreed by Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband that the respondent will pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- and shall return all the articles which were given to him at the time of marriage. Today the respondent-husband and his father, who are present in the Court, changed their lawyer and engaged Mr. Mokhtar Khan. Mr. Mokhtar Khan who argued that the respondent is not in a positioin to fulfil the promise made on the last date. Today, supplementary affidavit has been filed by the appellant stating, inter alia, that the following articles were given to the respondent at the time of marriage :

(2.) AT the very out set, we must clarify that there is typographical mistake in the second item of second paragraph i.e. Rs. 55,000/-. It appears that instead of Rs. 5,000/- it was wrongly typed as Rs. 55,000/-.

(3.) PRIMA facie, the impugned order and decree of divorce is erroneous in law. The divorce petition was filed on 1.5.2008 when the appellant-wife was living with the respondent-husband in the same house. Before issuance of summons, appellant was made to appear in the suit by the husband/respondent. The matter was ultimately referred to Lok Adalat. On 30.8.2008 a petition was filed for mutual divorce before the Lok Adalat. Before compliance of provision of Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, the Lok Adalat passed the decree for divorce.