Hon'ble KESHOTE - (1.) THIS appeal, under Section 19 of the Family Court Act, is directed by the appellant husband against the judgment and decree, dated 6. 2. 2003, of the Family Court No. 1, Jaipur in Petition No. 105/2001.
(2.) THE respondent wife, on 30. 3. 2001, filed the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Family Court No. 1, Jaipur, for dissolution of her marriage with the appellant husband. THE respondent wife prayed for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the grounds, cruelty and desertion. The appellant husband contested the divorce petition by filing a detailed reply thereto on 28/7/2001. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned Family Court, on 22/2/2002 framed three issues for trial in the petition. In support of their cases, both the parties examined themselves. They did not produce any other oral evidence. The learned Family Court, under the impugned judgment and decree, dated 6. 2. 2003, allowed the petition and dissolved the marriage of the respondent wife with the appellant husband by a decree of divorce. The learned Trial Court found both the grounds proved, on which divorce was sought for in the petition, thus this special appeal. In the appeal the appellant husband submitted many documents, which are not the part of the record of divorce petition. The respondent wife has not raised any objection against consideration of these documents and we have considered the same. Out of those documents, one is the letter of the appellant husband addressed to Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the Court. The learned Counsel for the appellant husband contended that the ground of cruelty pleaded by the respondent wife in the divorce petition and accepted by the Court below was not a ground available to her. In his submission there is no question of any cruelty as the 'gauna' ceremony was not performed of the husband and wife; the wife did not come to the matrimonial home and thus there was no occasion with the appellant husband to make her subjected to any cruelty as what she has pleaded and found proved by the learned Family Court.
(3.) IT has next been contended that as there was no 'gauna' ceremony, there was no cohabitation after marriage and thus no question does arise of desertion and the respondent wife was not entitled on this ground for dissolution of their marriage by a decree of divorce. In support of her contentions, the learned Counsel for the appellant husband placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Savitri Pandey vs. Prem Chandra Pandey, 2002 WLC (SC) Civil 116. Lastly it is contended that the marriage of the respondent wife and the appellant husband was solemnized on 27. 6. 1991. At the time of their marriage, both, the appellant husband and the respondent wife were minor and, therefore, their marriage was void; and the respondent wife could have filed a petition to get the same declared void but the petition for divorce on the grounds as pleaded, is not maintainable. ;