No objections, no evidence, no cross-examination; divorce upheld

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru:

The divorce granted to a husband in 2016 after a wife who failed to file a statement of objections, file evidence or subject her husband to cross-examination has been upheld by a division bench of the High Court recently. The Division Bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil said, “It is trite law that if a witness is not subjected to cross examination by the other side, his testimony is deemed to have been accepted.”

The couple was married in 2010 and had a child in 2011. In 2014 the husband filed a petition for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act. He claimed that his wife had left him two years earlier and despite a notice had not returned to the matrimonial home. He sought divorce on grounds of desertion. In April 2016, the family court granted him divorce holding that the averments made on his behalf as well as his evidence before the court have not been controverted on behalf of the wife.

It also held that the ground of desertion under the Act was proved. The wife approached the HC with an appeal in 2016 which was disposed of recently. The HC upheld the decision of the family court. “We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the record. Admittedly, the appellant/ wife was served with notice of the proceedings and has engaged counsel. The counsel participated in the proceedings before the family court.

However, neither any statement of objections was filed nor any evidence was tendered on behalf of the appellant/wife,” the HC noted. The HC said that the allegation of desertion made by the husband was proved. “In the absence of any rebuttal of averments made in the petition under Section 13 of the Act as well as the fact that the respondent/husband was not subjected to cross-examination, the family court has rightly concluded that the appellant/wife has deserted the respondent/husband for a continuous period of two years immediately preceding the two years of presentation of the petition. The ground for desertion therefore, has duly been proved. The finding recorded by the family court does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference of this court in this appeal,” it said.