FAO No. M-160 of 2011 [ 1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. M-160 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.5.2011 Kulwinder Kaur ..Appellant v. Surinder Singh .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Raman Mahajan, Advocate for the appellant. ... Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 21.3.2011, passed by the learned court below, in a petition filed by the appellant and the respondent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Learned counsel for the appellant-wife submitted that consent of the appellant in the present case had been obtained by fraud. Though it was stated in the petition that they were living separate since June, 2009, however, the fact is that the parties were living together in the same house till 27.4.2011, as she was turned out of the matrimonial home after passing of decree of divorce. She was made to appear in the court and get her statement recorded as the infant child born out of the wedlock in December, 2009 was kept at the residence by the husband. However, all these facts, which are sought to be argued by learned counsel for the appellant, are not on record either before this court or before the learned court below. The same would require recording of evidence. Merely on the oral statement of learned counsel for the appellant regarding the facts, which are not on record, interference with the order passed by the learned court below may not be possible. The appellant, if FAO No. M-160 of 2011 [ 2] so advised, may approach the court below for setting aside the decree of divorce or for any other appropriate relief. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Consequently, the accompanying application is also dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 25.5.2011 mk