HC allows woman to challenge divorce on grounds of adultery

The woman's appeal had been allowed by the District Court of Ahmednagar despite a delay of three-and-half years

Press Trust of India Mumbai
Last Updated : Apr 11 2013 | 4:07 PM IST
A woman has been allowed to challenge a family court order granting her husband divorce on the grounds that she lived an adulterous life by the Bombay High Court which condoned the delay in filing the appeal saying that such a premise could be a "stigma" for life.

The woman's appeal had been allowed by the District Court of Ahmednagar despite a delay of three-and-half years. Being aggrieved, her husband moved the High Court which upheld the district court's order of condoning the delay.

"If the respondent-wife is not allowed to prosecute the appeal, it will cause irreparable loss and her future life will be ruined. The observations that she lived an adulterous life will continue to remain without any opportunity to her for redressal of her grievance," observed Justice Shambaji Shinde recently.

"It is only by way of prosecuting the appeal filed before the District Court that she can get over such allegations. If the divorce decree is confirmed only because the husband has performed second marriage, it will affect not only status of the respondent-wife but it will also affect upon her future life since the competent court has observed that she lived in adultery," Justice Shinde remarked.

The husband filed a divorce plea in 2001. The family court in Ahmednagar granted divorce in 2005. The man married again and had children from the second marriage.

The wife filed an appeal against the decree of divorce after three-and-half years pleading that she was not aware about the divorce granted by the court. She said her advocate had not informed her about this development.

The husband said the respondent was throughout aware about the proceedings before the trial court as she had participated in the same and led evidence. She was aware about the grounds on which divorce decree was passed, he contended.

The wife, on the other hand, pleaded that she was not made aware about the divorce granted by the court and hence she did not file appeal within the period of limitation.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Apr 11 2013 | 4:00 PM IST

Next Story