Divorce case: Parties not at issue
Hi,
My wife has filed for divorce under HMA section 13 on the grounds of mental cruelty. In her divorce petition she has asked for three reliefs:
1. Divorce on the grounds of mental cruelty against her
2. Other financial relief as decided by the judge [Yes. She has not specified the grounds or even the amount she is seeking. But she has clarified in her replication that she is not seeking any relief under HMA section 25]
3. Law suite expenses without any specified amount
She has filed separate petitions under HMA section 24 and crpc 125.
I have already filed my written statement and she has given a replication. Issues have not been framed yet.
If on the next date, I give an application to the court saying, I have no objection to the first relief sought be the petitioner. Or in other words, I am OK with the court giving her divorce on the grounds of mental cruelty. What will happen? Will I be right in thinking that the judge will apply the provision of Order XV, rule 1 to give divorce on the first hearing itself?
If I give an application to the court saying that her second relief, "Other financial relief as decided by the judge" pleading be struck out under Order VI rule 16 of CPC because it violates Order VII rule 2 of CPC, will the judge likely strike out her pleading/relief request?
Thanks.
Asked 6 years ago in Family Law
Religion: Hindu
Thanks. My wife has already admitted in her replication that she is in a decent job and at a decent salary (>60K take home per month). There is also a house in her home town, which is in our joint names. I do not mind paying say INR 20-30K per month as maintenance to my son and letting them keep the house. Therefore, I am not afraid of CRPC 125 or HMA 24. My guess is that the order will be 20-30K maintenance to son as I will suggest to the court and no maintenance to wife. I had deliberately, not denied one or two minor allegations in my WS. I guess, no denial means admission in CPC. So, the court can use that to give divorce. Also, I think there is a judicial maxim, "Equity aids the vigilant, not those who slumber on their rights", which will mean if I am not ready to fight for my right to prove my innocence, why should the court insist on proving that I did not commit mental cruelty!
As this is not a divorce by mutual consent application, I am not sure that the rule of two motions will apply.
Asked 6 years ago
Thanks a lot to all for your answers. It appears that I have asked some tricky questions and that is why all the lawyers are disagreeing with one another!
When my wife filed for divorce, she tried to mislead the court about her employment and salary. This is why I had to respond and request the court to call for her Form 26-AS under Order XI, rule 12. This forced her to admit her salary and employment status in her replication. Now, I do not mind divorce as my maintenance liability will be comparatively limited. Had I allowed it to go ex parte, she could have given a follow up application for maintenance (which she did anyway in a separate, subsequent petitions Under HMA 24 and crpc 125) and the court could have given her a massive award. Going ex parte would have meant, I would have had no chance to appeal even if the maintenance amount was ridiculously high.
Asked 6 years ago