CR No.8374/2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.8374/2010 Date of decision: 09.11.2011. Tanvir Singh ....................Petitioner v. Tajwinder Kaur .....................Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.APS Rehan,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.RD Bawa,Advocate for the respondent. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Petitioner-husband has filed the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the order dated 5.10.2010(P2) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur whereby in the divorce petition filed by the petitioner on the ground of cruelty, the application moved by him for treating the subsequent events as part and parcel of his divorce petition and to lead evidence in that regard has been dismissed. Briefly noticed the undisputed facts are that the marriage between the petitioner-husband and respondent-wife was solemnised 17 years ago and two children were born out of the said wedlock. The petitioner filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. The petitioner concluded his evidence on 31.7.2008 and the respondent wife closed her evidence on 14.11.2008 and now the case is fixed for rebuttal evidence and arguments. It is case of the petitioner that after he closed his evidence the CR No.8374/2010 2 respondent wife made false and frivolous complaints against his parents and other family members before police authorities, which, on enquiries were found to be false and frivolous. Citing the said complaints to be an act of cruelty the petitioner moved an application dated 20.8.2009 before the learned Additional District Judge for treating the subsequent events as part and parcel of the main petition and also sought permission to lead further evidence in that regard. The said application was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge vide impugned order dated 5.10.2010. Heard. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that learned Additional District Judge has erred in law in dismissing the application. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. The evidence in divorce petition filed by the petitioner on the ground of cruelty has already been concluded by both sides and the case is now fixed for rebuttal evidence and arguments. Petitioner's prayer for treating the subsequent events to be part and parcel of his divorce petition and to permit him to lead evidence in that regard, in my considered opinion, is not permissible and accordingly the learned Additional District Judge has rightly dismissed his application. Dismissed. 09.11.2011 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge