G.R.MAJITHIA, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of District Judge, Faridabad, dated 6/09/1991, dissolving the marriage of the parties to the lis, without going into the merits of the allegations and counter allegations, in the light of the Referee's verdict.
(2.) The appellant/husband (hereinafter the husband) filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, the Act) against the respondent-wife (hereinafter the wife) for restitution of conjugal rights. The wife filed counter-claim petition under Section 23-A, of the Act seeking relief under Section 13 for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. During the pendency of these petitions, the husband and his counsel made the following statement before the matrimonial Court on 2/08/1991 :- "On involving a number of our relations and common friends, we tried to sort out our differences but unfortunately our efforts proved futile. All the same we have not yet lost hope and have, therefore, agreed to appoint Shri R. S. Bhatia, Retired District and Sessions Judge, now residing in Sector 9 at Faridabad, as our sole referee. We shall present our respective versions before him and abide by his verdict in its letters and spirit on all of our matrimonial disputes. The matter may kindly be referred to him. We shall pay him some remuneration also in equal proportions but the quantum may please be fixed by the Court." On the same day, the wife and her counsel made the following statement before the Matrimonial Court :- "We have heard and appraised the statement of the petitioner. We accept it as a faithful representation on our agreement. The matter may please be handed over to our referee Shri R. S. Bhatia." In the light of these statements, the Matrimonial Court appointed Shri R. S. Bhatia, a retired District and Sessions Judge, as the sole referee of the parties vide order dated 2/08/1991. The same reads thus :- "In the light of the above recorded statements of the parties and on hearing them, I hereby approve their proposal to refer the matter to their sole Referee Shri R. S. Bhatia, Retired District and Sessions Judge. Both the parties shall present their respective versions before him and shall abide by his verdict on all issues pertaining to their matrimonial disputes. A consolidated fee of Rs. 660.00 (Rupees six hundred and sixty) only shall be paid to him by both the parties in equal proportions. At this stage, on being called Shri R. S. Bhatia agreed to take up the matter as the sole referee of the parties. He has assured the court to give his verdict at the earliest available opportunity. "Now to come up on 6-9-1991 for scrutiny." It also bears the signature of Shri R. S. Bhatia. 3. The Referee Shri R. S. Bhatia submitted his award / report dated 20/08/1991. The same reads thus : "I was appointed Sole Referee by this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 2-8-91, to give verdict with regard to the matrimonial disputes between the parties. 2. Both parties along with their friends and relatives appeared before me on 9-8-91 at 9.00 a.m. The list from bridegroom's side is as under :- 1. Sh. Raj Kumar, the husband. 2. Sh. Krishan Murari (father of Raj Kumar), 3. Sh. Shyam Behari (uncle of Raj Kumar), 4. Sh. Jai Shiv Hari (uncle of Raj Kumar), 5. Sh. Brij Behari Bansal, 6. Sh. Tulsi Ram Bansal. From Bride's side : 1. Smt. Anjana Gupta, the wife, 2. Sh. Trilok Chand (father of Anjana), 3. Sh. S. C. Goel (uncle of Anjana), 4. Sh. Pushkar Raj Gupta (brother of Anjana), 5. Shri Vinod Goel, Advocate, Counsel for Anjana.
(3.) I heard the parties and their companions in detail and perused the pleadings of the parties in the matrimonial file and went through the papers relating to the case under Section 498-A, I.P.C. However, it was agreed by both sides that one adjournment should be given so that one more attempt to compromise the matter could be made. They said they would bring some more respectables with them on the next hearing. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned to 18-8-1991, the date of the choice of both the parties. On the insistence of the bridegroom's side, the time of the meeting was fixed as 11.00 a.m. they said they could not come earlier. 4. On the adjourned date i.e. 18-8-91, the bride's side arrived at 11.00 a.m. sharp. Their team consisted of the following :- 1. Smt. Anjana Gupta, the bride. 2. Sh. Trilok Chand (father of Anjana). 3 Sh. S. C. Goel (Anjana's father's brother). 4. Sh. Ashok Goel (Anjana's father's brother). 5. Master Daya Chand. 6. Sh. Mam Chand Sharma, 7. Sh. Om Parkash Sharma, 8. Sh. Om Parkash Goel, 9. Sh. Pushkar Raj Gupta (Anjana's brother). 5. We waited upto 11.30 a.m. but the boy's side did not turn up. Therefore, the session dispersed without conducting any proceedings. 6. However, four persons from the bridegroom's side turned up at 11.50 a.m. They were told that since they had not turned up in time, the other party had been sent away and now they too could not be heard. 7. In this way, no proceedings were conducted on 18-8-91, but that is immaterial so far as the hearing of the case is concerned as the same was completed on the first hearing (i.e. on 9-8-91). 8. After hearing the parties in detail and going through the papers and after giving a serious thought to the matter, I submit the following verdict :- (i) That the marriage between the parties be dissolved by a decree of divorce without going into the allegations and counter-allegations of the parties. (ii) If verdict No. (i) is accepted and implemented, Raj Kumar, the Bridegroom shall pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000.00 (Rupees one Lakh only) to the bride, Anjana Kumari to compensate her for marriage expenses and dowry articles. (iii) After the amount mentioned in verdict No. (ii) has been paid, the case under Sections 498-A and 406 etc., I.P.C. registered with FIR No. 249 dated 27-10-90, P. S. Hodel, pending in court of Judicial Magistrate, Palwal, shall be withdrawn and the dowry articles seized in that case shall be returned to Raj Kumar.";