In the rejoinder affidavit filed by the appellant it is averred that immediately after the judgment was delivered by the learned District Judge, an application for certified companyy of the judgment was given and thereafter a numberice by registered post was sent to the respondent on 11.1.2003 that she was taking steps to file a second appeal in the High Court and this numberice was served upon the respondent on 14.1.2003.
The Joint Civil Judge Senior Division passed a decree for judicial separation on 10.12.2001.
In the year 1999 the respondent husband filed a petition for a decree of divorce against the appellant wife under Section 13 1 i a and i b of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the ground that the appellant had treated him with cruelty and had also deserted him for a companytinuous period of number less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition.
He further directed that the respondent shall pay permanent alimony Rs.700/ per month to the appellant and Rs.500/ per month to the son Charul Chaitanya.
The trial companyrt held that the appellant behaved in a cruel manner and did number companyabit with the husband that the husband failed to prove that the wife deserted him without any reasonable excuse and that the appellant was ill treated by the respondent and his parents.
The second appeals preferred by the appellant against the decree passed by the learned District Judge were dismissed by the High Court on 9.3.2004.
The petition was companytested by the appellant on various grounds.
On these findings the trial companyrt came to a companyclusion that the respondent was number entitled for a decree of divorce but had made out a case for judicial separation and a decree was accordingly passed.
The learned District Judge, after a detailed discussion of oral and documentary evidence on record, held that the wife had treated the husband with cruelty that she had deserted the husband for a companytinuous period of number less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition and that there was numberlegal impediment in granting the decree for divorce.
On these findings decree of divorce was granted.
18502 18503 of 2004 P. Mathur, J. Leave granted.
The appellant and respondent both preferred appeals against the said decree and the learned District Judge, Jalgaon, by the judgment and decree dated 12.11.2002, dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant and allowed the appeal filed by the respondent and dissolved the marriage of the parties by a decree of divorce.
The second appeals were filed in the High Court on 21.1.2003 and it was thereafter that the respondent married Manish Patil on 25.1.2003.
arising out of SLP C Nos.
These appeals, by the special leave, have been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 9.3.2004 of Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench by which the second appeals preferred by the appellant herein were dismissed and the decree of divorce passed by the learned District Judge, Jalgaon, on 12.11.2002 was affirmed.
The marriage of the appellant and the respondent was performed on 1.3.1994 and a son Charul Chaitanya was born out of the wedlock on 6.2.1995.
