Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Neha Bharadwaj (Trivedi) vs Udbhav Trivedi on 29 November, 2023
Author: Sheel Nagu
Bench: Sheel Nagu
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 29 th OF NOVEMBER, 2023
FIRST APPEAL No. 1448 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SMT. NEHA BHARADWAJ (TRIVEDI) W/O UDBHAV
TRIVEDI, D/O. STYANARAYAN BHARADWAJ, AGED
ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/O. 20 KRISHNA RESIDENCY, 100 FT
ROAD KALINDI BIHAR, AGRA (UTTAR PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI RAKESH KESHARWANI - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. UDBHAV TRIVEDI S/O UPMANYU TRIVEDI, AGED
ABOUT 27 YEARS, H.NO. 125, E-4, ARERA COLONY,
P.S. HABIBGANJ BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. ARVIND DEEVAN @ ARVIND SINGH S/O NOT
MENTION, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O.
BHOOTESHWAR ROAD, KOTWALI P.S. TRAFFIC
POLICE, MATHURA (UTTAR PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI AMIT KHATRI - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, Justice Devnarayan
Mishra passed the following:
ORDER
This appeal has been filed being aggrieved by the judgment and decree
passed by the Family Court, Bhopal dated 11.05.2023 by which the petition of
the respondent-husband under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has
been allowed and the marriage between the appellant and respondent has been
dissolved.
2. In short, the petition before the Trial Court was that the appellant-wife
[Smt. Neha Bhardwaj (Trivedi)] married with respondent No.1-Udhav Trivedi
on 20.01.2019 as per Hindu Rituals and Customs. After some time of the
marriage, the difference arose and the petition for divorce was filed against the
appellant.
3. By the impugned judgment, the Family Court Bhopal has allowed the
petition and dissolved the marriage, therefore, this appeal has been filed by the
appellant-wife.
4. During argument, learned counsel for the appellant-wife argued that
the Family Court, Bhopal has not given proper opportunity to the appellant to
adduce her evidence. The case for the first time was fixed for adducing her
evidence on 27.02.2023. On that date, the Advocates were abstaining from the
work, therefore, no progress was made in this case. Next date was fixed for
10.03.2023. On that date, the appellant-wife was not present before the Court.
The case was thereafter fixed for adducing her evidence on 25.03.2023. On that
date, her petition for transferring the case from the Trial Court was dismissed
by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal and the case was fixed for adducing
her evidence on 08.04.2023. On that date, appellant/wife was not well therefore
Advocate for the wife filed application for short adjournment but the case was
not adjourned and instead her right to adduce evidence was closed. Thereafter
the case was fixed for 25.04.2023 and on that date also, she filed an application
under Section 151 of C.P.C. and requested to give opportunity to adduce the
evidence but that was not granted and on 28.04.2023, the arguments were heard
and the judgment was passed on 11.05.2023.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently argued that the
appellant was afforded due and sufficient opportunity but she herself was not
interested to adduce her evidence. She has thus not availed the opportunity
available, hence the Trial Court rightly proceeded further and passed the
judgment.
6. We have heard the parties at length and perused the record of the
Family Court, Bhopal.
7. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case that on the first
date, the case was fixed for non-applicant's evidence. Advocates were
abstaining from the work, therefore, no progress could be made. On 10.03.2023
and 25.03.2023 two adjournments were granted whereafter on 08.04.2023 her
right to adduce evidence was closed. From the record, it appears that the
appellant was not interested in pursuing her case properly. She was lingering the
case but justice should not only be done but it must appear to be done.
8. Moreso, every case deserves to be decided on merits after hearing
both sides. Looking to these legal principles, the instant appeal is allowed. The
impugned judgment and decree dated 11.05.2023 is quashed.
8.1 The case is remanded to the concerned Family Court, Bhopal with
the direction that if appellant-wife Smt. Neha Bhardwaj (Trivedi) deposits
Rs.5,000/- as cost in favor of District Legal Services Authority, Bhopal. Then
two opportunities shall be given to her for adducing all her evidence on those
two dates. The dates will be fixed with the consent of both the parties and their
counsels. No adjournment shall be granted except for compelling circumstances
which are beyond the control of the concerned parties. The Family Court,
Bhopal will be entitled to pass the judgment and decree after hearing the parties
and considering the evidence if adduced.
9. With the above directions, the appeal is partly allowed. The record
alongwith copy of this order be sent to the concerned Family Court, Bhopal
immediately.
10. Parties shall appear before the concerned Family Court on
08.01.2024.
11. DLSA, Bhopal is directed to utilise this cost to further the objects of
any of the NLSA/MPSLSA Schemes, but only after seeking prior approval
from MPSLSA.
12. No order as to cost.
(SHEEL NAGU) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
HK
