Delhi District Court
Manmohan Pall vs Smt. Chander Pall on 13 March, 2007
1
IN THE COURT OF SH GURDEEP SINGH ADJ DELHI
In the matter of:
Manmohan Pall .......Petitioner
V
Smt. Chander Pall ......Respondent
13.3.07
ORDER
1. Vide this order I shall decide the application dated 11.11.05 moved on behalf of respondent seeking permission to file sur-rejoinder and claim for legal expenses from the petitioner.
2. The relevant facts for the disposal of the present applications are that the petitioner/husband had filed the petition for dissolution of marriage under section (i) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against respondent/wife on 16.04.96.
3. The petition was contested. Thereafter the respondent filed the application for maintenance under section 24 of HMA.
4. Vide order dated 16.03.99, my Ld. Predecessor after recording the 2 evidence of both the parties passed the consent order whereby Rs. 1000/- per month was fixed as maintenance payable to the respondent towards minor child and Rs. 2000/- was paid as litigation expenses. Thereafter the written statement was filed on 03.05.99. The replication was filed on 11.10.99 and on the same day my Ld. Predecessor framed the issues. Thereafter the application under order 6 rule 16 was moved by the respondent for striking out the additional averment in the replication which was dismissed by my Ld. Predecessor vide order dated 17.5.05. However while deciding the application my Ld. Predecessor has given an option to move an application for seeking permission to file sur-rejoinder with respect to the additional averment in the replication.
5. Earlier petitioner filed application under order 6 rule 16 dated 7.2.2000 stating that some portion be struck off from the replication. Vide order dated 15.9.05 my Ld. Predecessor came to the conclusion that from the pleadings of the parties it can not be said that the facts mentioned in the replication are intentional, scandalous, frivolous and vexatious. However, it is stated that they may prejudice the defence of the respondent and it was stated that the applicant may move an application seeking permission 3 to file sur-rejoinder. Hence this application is.
6. It is stated that the respondent wants to file a sur-rejoinder with a view of false contradictory and scandalous statement made in replication to W.S. dated 10.8.99 and further to bring on record some more new facts which have come to the knowledge of the applicant subsequent to filing of the written statement and she has mentioned in two headings mis deeds and business deeds. Business deeds is preliminary with respect to the maintenance part and in the last portion also she has claimed with respect to the maintenance.
7. The reply to this application was filed and it was contested on the ground that the respondent has moved the present application seeking legal expenses under section 24 Hindu Marriage Act as well which she had already filed and which was dismissed on 5.8.96. The application was also contested on the merit.
8. I have heard the counsel of the parties and also have gone through the records. In the application for sur-rejoinder it is not mentioned that in respect to what paras she wishes to file the sur-rejoinder but from the oder dated 15.9.05 of my Ld. Predecessor I find that the petitioner has stated in 4 his replication in para 7 and para 8.
9. On the perusal of the replication it is transpired that certain facts were mentioned in para 7 at page 44which were preliminary averment that starts on 'at least two occasions, in such situation she had even said that the children are not born from the union between the petitioner and the respondent' and in para 8 at page 44 that 'the respondent spent her time in kitty parties in company of persons of doubtful character'. These averments are made for the first time, therefore it needs to be replied and I accordingly permit the respondent to file sur-rejoinder only with respect to these two averments mentioned in para 7 and para 8.
10.Accordingly, the application is allowed. The application with respect to the other facts to be incorporated and sur-rejoinder is however declined as it can not be incorporated in sur-rejoinder.
11.Put up for filing of rejoinder and the sur-rejoinder be filed within a period of 10 days with advance copy to the counsel to the petitioner. Put up on 23.3.07 for filing documents, admissions/denial and issues.
Announced today (GURDEEP SINGH) on 13.3.07 ADJ/DELHI/13.3.07