Select Location
Family

BOMBAY HC SLAMS TRIAL COURT FOR PRONOUNCING JUDGMENT WITHOUT TAKING EVIDENCE INTO ACCOUNT

An order of the Family Court in Sholapur was set aside by the Bombay HC, where the court allowed the respondents application seeking cancellation of maintenance and rejected the petitioners application where she sought compensation for herself and her son.
740

An order of the Family Court in Sholapur was set aside by the Bombay HC, where the court allowed the respondent’s application seeking cancellation of maintenance and rejected the petitioner’s application where she sought compensation for herself and her son.

Earlier while giving the judgment, the family court relied on an order dated December 21, 2016 where the petition for divorce filed by the respondent on the grounds of adultery was allowed. This order was challenged by the petitioner but the family court said that since the petitioner couldn’t present the copy of the order of the family order, her contention stands rejected. 

The respondent had filed his divorce petition in 2004 on the grounds of adultery and desertion. As per the respondent, the petitioner was living in adultery with a man named “Gautam Pawar”. The family court allowed petition for divorce on the grounds of desertion only and not adultery. Again on an application filed by the petitioner, adultery couldn’t be proved. Hence, all the charges of adultery were rejected on three separate instances. 

The Bombay HC heavily criticized the approach taken by the family court and said, it was the least expected from the trial court that divorce was granted on the grounds of desertion and not adultery at all and the trial court without reading the judgment for divorce assumed it to be on the grounds of adultery and further gave an order, dismissing the petitioner’s application for maintenance when the same couldn’t be proved thrice on different instances. In addition, the HC also held that the evidence on record were not taken into account properly and it drew conclusion from the material facts only. 

The court held the cancellation of amount of maintenance to be totally illegal and unjust and hence, allowed the criminal revision application increasing the maintenance amount for the petitioner and her son. 
 

Follow Myadvo to be updated with daily legal news and top legal updates in India!

Image Source

Reviewed by:
Mehak Sharma
Published on 11-Oct-17
740 views

Book a Govt. Service

Name Change

4.2
33 reviews