MATRF No. 2 of 1999 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH MATRF No. 2 of 1999 Date of Decision: 5.09.2009 Dr.Soleman Chatterjee ...Petitioner Vs. Dr.Savita Rohini ..Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod K.Sharma Present: None. Vinod K.Sharma,J. (Oral) This reference under section 17 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (for short the Act) has been made by learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana on a petition filed by the petitioner Dr.Soleman Chatterjee. The petitioner filed a petition under section 10 of the Act for dissolution of marriage on the pleadings that the parties are Christian and were married on 29.12.1985 according to Christian rites and ceremonies. The parties lived together as husband and wife for some time at Ludhiana and thereafter at Delhi. From the wedlock one son was born on 2.12.1991. Parties last resided at Junior Doctors Hostel, CMC, Ludhiana. It was pleaded that from the very beginning respondent did not cooperate with the petitioner and was not willing to bear a child and without his consent she MATRF No. 2 of 1999 2 got aborted 3 times in Private Nursing Home. It was alleged that she developed illicit relations with some unknown persons and the petitioner caught the respondent with adulterer in the naked condition in CMC Hostel on 1.6.1992 and thereafter there was no relationship between the parites as husband and wife. Respondent left the petitioner on 5.7.1992 and she performed second marriage. He moved a separate application under section 11 of the Indian Divorce Act for not impleading the adulterer as co- respondent. On notice nobody put in appearance on behalf of the respondent and she was proceeded ex parte on 14.5.1998. Learned Additional District Judge on the basis of ex patre evidence held that the respondent was guilty of adultery and therefore, the petitioner was held entitled to a decree of divorce. The evidence led proved that there is no collusion between the parties. No body has put in appearance on behalf of the parties. No body has put in appearance on behalf of the parties. Special Bench of Lahore High Court in the case of Inayat Masih Vs. Mt.Dhani w/o Inayat Masih and another AIR (31) 1944 Lahore 162, has been pleased to lay down that High Court has power to act on a reference under section 17 of the Divorce Act without any further application by the parties. The High Court under section 17 of the Act can proceed with reference for the confirmation of decree of dissolution of marriage passed by the learned District Judge even when the parties are absent, and have not obtained a motion for confirmation of the decree. MATRF No. 2 of 1999 3 The reading of the judgment and evidence on record proves that there were sufficient grounds to justify the dissolution of marriage. Decision of the learned Additional District Judge is, therefore, correct on facts and deserves to be confirmed. Ordered accordingly. The decree of divorce dissolving the marriage between the parties is confirmed. (Vinod K.Sharma) 5.09.2009 Judge rp