Karnataka High Court
Smt. Nancy A vs Sri.John Peter on 5 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:14033
WP No. 8025 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO. 8025 OF 2024 (GM-FC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. NANCY A,
W/O JOHN PETER,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
NO. 236, 6TH CROSS,
3RD MAIN ROAD, NEW KAVIKA LAYOUT,
MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 026.
ALSO AT:
RESIDING AT NO. 208,
BHOOMIKA SUNRISE APARTMENT,
KEMBANTHHALLI MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 083.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. GAURAV C.N, ADVOCATE)
Digitally AND:
signed by
SUVARNA T SRI. JOHN PETER,
Location: S/O ANTONY DASS,
HIGH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
COURT OF RESIDING FLAT NO. 001
KARNATAKA GROUND FLOOR, "OCHRE",
MSO COLONY, BANASAWADI ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 005.
...RESPONDENT
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.01.2024 (ANNEXURE -A) ON IN
NO. 13 IN MC NO. 3321/2020 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL
PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, AT BENGALURU AND
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:14033
WP No. 8025 of 2024
THEREBY ALLOW APPLICATION IA NO. 13 IN M.C NO.
3321/2020 AND PASS SUCH ORDERS DEEMS FIT AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.13 filed under Order VI Rule 16 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in M.C.No.3321/2020 dated 17.01.2024 on the file of I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the Court below had dismissed I.A.No.13, the wife is before this Court.
2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience.
3. The respondent herein that is the husband has filed M.C.No.3321/2020 against the wife seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty. In the plaint, several incidents were averred and allegations against the wife regarding how she is not a good wife and what are the acts that are -3- NC: 2024:KHC:14033 WP No. 8025 of 2024 done by the wife which constitutes cruelty. At para No.13 of the plaint, the husband had stated as follows:
"The petitioner submits that the harassment of the respondent reached penultimate when on one occasion, she openly told the petitioner that she will sleep with anyone and that the petitioner has no right to question her and that she will need 10 men to satisfy her and definitely she will not think about the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner was subjected to immense mental agony, emotional and psychological stress after hearing to obnoxious things from the respondent and the petitioner has not done anything to hear such vulgarity from the woman he married to. The petitioner would have preferred to be deaf rather than hearing such vulgar words from the respondent."
4. The wife had filed her written statement and now, the matter is coming up for respondent's evidence. At this juncture, I.A.No.13 is filed to strike off the pleadings made in Para No.13 as it is frivolous and vexatious and it caused permanent injury to the wife and those allegations are only made to stain the reputation of the wife and they are scandalous in nature.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:14033 WP No. 8025 of 2024
5. The Court below had passed the impugned order by dismissing the petition. The Court below had observed that the plaintiff is the author of the plaint and except the plaintiff, no others have any right to say with regard to the pleadings raised by him and it is the same thing with regard to the defendant and the parties are governed by their pleadings. It is the case of the wife that though the evidence of the husband is completed, he has not produced any evidence to substantiate para No.13 of the pleadings. Hence, the same has to be deleted. The Court below had observed that if para No.13 is scandalous and abuse of process of Court, the wife is entitled to initiate action if the pleadings raised are not proved. The Court below observed that it is premature to say anything with regard to para No.13 of the petition and accordingly, I.A.No.13 was dismissed.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that the allegations that are made against the wife at para No.13 of the petition are scandalous and such -5- NC: 2024:KHC:14033 WP No. 8025 of 2024 language is nothing short of character assassination and the feelings of the wife are affected by it. Without appreciating the contentions raised by the wife, the Court below had dismissed the petition. It is submitted that for believing the said para No.13, no evidence is produced. When an application is filed under Order VI Rule 16, no other evidence is required looking at the allegations or the particular paragraph, the Court below can pass orders. He submits that the Court below without appreciating the contentions in its proper perspective had dismissed the petition.
7. This Court has perused the order passed by the Court below and the affidavit filed by the petitioner before the Court below. In para No.13 as extracted in the preceding paragraph, certain allegations are made against the wife. The husband has filed M.C.No.3321/2020 seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and according to him, what has transpired between them and he has stated several incidents that amounts to cruelty. When he says -6- NC: 2024:KHC:14033 WP No. 8025 of 2024 something, the burden lies on the plaintiff to substantiate the same. If the husband fails to substantiate the same, the wife is at liberty to take appropriate action and remedies are still open. The Court had considered the application within the scope of Order VI Rule 16 and dismissed the application.
8. In that view of the matter, this Court finds no reasons to interfere with the order passed by the Court below.
i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5 CT: BHK