1 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Family Court Appeal No.88 of 2003 Shri Chandrakant B. Vidhate Appellant Vs. Sou. Ratnamala C. Vidhate & anr. Respondents Ms.Anita Agarwal for appellant. Mr.A.A.Garge for resp.no.1. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & K.K.TATED,JJ. January 17, 2009. P.C. 1. Undoubtedly during the pendency of this appeal Civil Application No.208 of 2000 came to be allowed by this Court on 5/10/2006 thereby allowing amendment in the Written Statement filed before the Family Court. As per the said amendment the wife contended that the appellant - husband contracted second marriage with another lady by name Hemlata and from the said second marriage he begot two daughters and one son. She also contended that despite the second marriage she was ready and willing to cohabit with the appellant and prayed for restitution of conjugal rights. 2. We have also noted that Civil Application No.201 of 2006 filed by the wife also came to be allowed as per the order dated 5/10/2006. This application was filed under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC 2 so as to bring on record the additional evidence and more particularly the evidence in respect of the second marriage and the children born out of the same. In para 4 of the order dated 5/10/2006 passed in Civil Application No.201 of 2006, this Court stated that issue regarding recording of further evidence on the documents brought on record by way of additional evidence will be decided during the course of hearing of the appeal. 3. When the appeal was taken up for hearing today, Mrs.Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant stoutly denied the factum of second marriage and also the appellant having begot two daughters and one son from his alleged second marriage with Hemlata and, therefore, she submitted that all these documents are required to be proved by leading evidence so as to establish the factum of second marriage. 4. Both the learned counsel agree that such evidence could be more efficaciously recorded by the Family Court on remand of the husband’s petition for divorce for fresh trial and on the basis of the Written Statement allowed to be amended by this Court as well as by allowing the parties to lead additional 3 evidence in respect of the documents brought on record. 5. Hence by consent we set aside the impugned order passed by the Family Court and restore Petition No.A-323 of 2001 to the file of the Family Court at Pune. The respondent - wife will place the amended Written Statement as well as the additional documents brought on record before this Court on the file of the Family Court within four weeks from today. Both the parties will be at liberty to adduce additional evidence. We direct that on remand Petition No.A-323 of 2001 shall be heard and decided as expeditiously as possible and in any case before 31st July 2009. Appeal disposed off accordingly. Parties to bear their own costs. 6. R. & P. be returned to the Family Court forthwith. (K.K.TATED,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)