HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR First Appeal (M) No.22 of 2007 APPELLANT]: Bala Prasad Pandey aged about 45 (Applicant) years, S/o late Ganesh Prasad Pandey, R/o Quarter No.M.l.G.1/50, Maharana' Pratap Nagar Korba, At present F.F.-2, Sevakum, Taiaja Road, Hill Drive Bhavnagar (Gujarat) Versus RESPONDENT/: Smt. Beena Pandey, aged about 40 (Non-applicant) years, W/o Bala Prasad Pandey, R/o MIG 1/50 Maharana Pratap Nagar, Tahsil and Distt. Korba {Appeal under Section 19 (1) of,the.Family Courts Act, 1984} Present: Mr. Parag Kotecha, counsel for the appellant. Mr. Sunil Sahu, counsel for the respondent. Division Bench: - Hon’ble Mr. T.P. Sharma & Hon’ble Mr. R.l.. Jhanwar, JJ ORAL JUDGMENT (23—1 1-2099) T.P. Sharma, J: — 1. This appeal under Section 19 (1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed aainst the judgrnent & decree dated 27—2-2007 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Korba in Civil Suit No.3-A/2006, whereby learned Judge, Family Court has dismissed the suit for dissolution of’marriage by a decree of divorce filed on behalf of the appellant herein on the ground that the appellant has not proved the ground available under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Judgment & decree are challenged on the groundp‘that/thes-Court below has not considered the proved fact of adultery, cruelty and desertion, and thereby committed illegality. g . Brief facts necessary for the disposal of‘thls appeal are that the parties Q/ é are Hindu legally wedded spouses, marriage between‘the parties was solemnized on 16-4-1982, they were residing together and discharging their maritai obligations. But according to the pleadings of the appellant, the respondent is living in adultery and has deserted the appellant, she has also committed cruelty upon the appellant, she assaulted him & his mother and she has thrown away the household articles of the appellant from the house of the appellant. The appellant made a complaint on 23- 3-2003 to the Police, but the Police has not taken any action and finally the petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce was filed by the appellant. 4. The respondent has denied the allegations and has specifically pleaded that she has never committed torture & cruelty, she' is not living in adultery and she has never deserted her husband. The allegations of the appellant are not just and proper that she is not discharging her marital obligations. 5. On the basis of the averments of the parties, issues were framed and after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, the Judge, Family Court has dismissed the petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned judgment & decree‘ and record of the Family Court. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that this is a y ‘ proved case of adultery, desertion and cruelty committed by the respondent The appellant has categorically deposed In his evudence 1; relating to his pleadings and has filed document and has also adduced l' evidence. Learned counsel further argued that even father of the pondent has lodged report against his daughter that the respondent is [k living in adultery and the appellant has made complaint to the Police on 23-3-2003. . On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the appeal and submitted that the respondent is discharging her marital obligations, she has not committed any cruelty or she has not deserted her husband and she is not living in adultery, but the appellant has made false allegations of adultery, cruelty & desertion. . ln the present case, the case of the appellant is mainly based on the alleged report lodged by the father of the respondent and the complaint made to the Police on 2343-2003 by the appellant in which he has mentioned that the respondent has committed cruelty, she assaulted him & his mother by hockey stick and also thrown away his household articles and destroyed the property. These are the important documents which have not been proved by the appellant. Parties have not been, represented by their counsel, they themselves have represented their case. This is a dispute between husband & wife and the Judge, Family Court is under obligation to try to resolve the dispute and provide opportunity of complete hearing to the parties, especially considering the evidence and material available on record and in accordance with law. The Judge, Family Court is also under obligation to provide opportunity of proving the documents. But the record of the Family Court reveals that though the appellant has filed copies of certain documents and the respondent has also filed certain documents, but the same have not been proved by them. Without proving the said documents no’“reliance can be placed upOn the unproved documents. 1‘6::Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the case should be remitted back for providing opportunity of hearing and adducing evidence to the parties including proving of the documents. 11.Consequently, the appeai is allowed. Judgment & decree impugned are hereby set aside. The case is remitted back to the Court of Judge, i Family Court, Korba for providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, t especiaiiy for proving their documents and adducing further evidence in their support and deciding the case afresh. Parties are directed. to present before the Court of Judge, Family Court, Korba on 18‘“ January, 2010. - 12.Record of the Family Court and copy of this judgment be sent to the Court concerned, immediately. 13.No order asrto costs. / 14. Decree be drawn up accordingly. I Sdl’ ' , sw‘ at: thaH‘Na‘ mdge T.P. Shanna Soma Judge