Telangana High Court
Bandraddi Divya Sahiti, vs Shri Praneet Chandra Bobbili, on 7 July, 2023
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1718 OF 2023
ORDER:(Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili) The Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the Docket Order dated 31.03.2023 in F.C.O.P.No.622 of 2022 on the file of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge cum VI Metropolitan Sessions Judge cum Family Court at Kukatpally for insisting the presence of petitioner-wife for recording evidence by the Court below.
2. Heard Sri M.Sai Chandrahaas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as respondent.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner had contended that the petitioner is the wife and the respondent is the husband. The petitioner is residing in United States of America and she has executed a G.P.A in favour of her brother and also recorded her evidence and got it notarized. The petitioner and the respondent are willing to take mutual divorce, but the Court below is not considering the case for grant of divorce and is insisting that the petitioner should be present physically, so as to record her evidence. Learned counsel relied upon the AKS,J 2 CRP No.1718 of 2023 judgment rendered by this Court in CRP No.875 of 2012 dated 19.03.2012 wherein, this Court held as under:
In the instant case, the petitioner expressed his inability to be personally present as he is living in UK. There does not appear to be any objection from the respondents's side for grant of divorce. As held by the Division Bench, unless there are suspicious circumstances or any reason to think that the averments contained in the affidavit filed by the petitioner may not be true, there is no reason for the lower Court to order personal presence of the petitioner. As noted above, the Special Power of Attorney Holder of the petitioner is pursuing the case and therefore, there is no requirement for the petitioner being personally present for disposal of the joint application filed for divorce. For the above-mentioned reasons, the civil revision petition is allowed. The lower Court is directed to dispose of O.P.No.619 of 2011 on the next date of hearing without insisting on the personal presence of the petitioner.
Learned counsel further contended that in view of the observations made by this Court in CRP No. 875 of 2012 dated 19.03.2012, the GPA holder can depose on behalf of the petitioner before the Court below and after recording evidence, the Court below can proceed with the case, in accordance with law.
4. This Court, having considered the aforesaid submissions is of the view that since the petitioner is a resident of United States of America and she has executed a GPA in favour of her AKS,J 3 CRP No.1718 of 2023 brother to proceed with the case, the Court below shall permit the GPA holder to proceed with the case, further, the Court below shall also take into account the evidence, which is recorded by the petitioner in the form of notarised affidavit.
Therefore, the Court below is directed to proceed with the case with GPA holder of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
5. With these observations, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this Civil Revision Petition, shall stand closed.
_________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J Date:07.07.2023 EDS/prat AKS,J 4 CRP No.1718 of 2023 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI C.R.P. No.1718 OF 2023 Date :07.07.2023 EDS/PRAT