LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

kashyap (abc)     28 March 2015

Voidable marriage section 12(1)a

Dear Sir


I have filed petition Voidable marriage under section 12(a)1 on 22 Sep 2012. Now medical has been conducted of the respondent and medical board report has received in court but new judge not doing proceeding either he is not reading medical report or not disposing maintenance application under section 24. he is not doing proceeding. in last hearing i asked true certified copy of medical report than he denied irritation of me he has given long date 5 months. 

let me know what is further process i.e. first either he will dispose maintenance application or reading medical report. after receiving medical he has proceeded two hearings but he has nothing done in two hearings.

if i write an letter to chief justice in high court than will he work expediently or not ? and what he can react.

can i take medical report through R.T.I. either from court or hospital?


 7 Replies

Adv. Chandrasekhar (Advocate)     28 March 2015

You ask your advocate and throw him file an application in the counter meant for this purpose in the court complex to get certified copy of the medical report and legally you are entitled to have it and you will get it within a week.  And also you are entitled to inspect the court file and get certified copies of the daily orders for the last few days in the manner said above.  After collating this infoirmation, have discussion with your advocate and if there is really a delay on the part of court, then you can move an application in the High Court for speedy disposal of your case.  Do not insist of disposing off S.24 application filed by the wife, which step defeats your interests.

kashyap (abc)     28 March 2015

thank u sir

you are saying that judge first proceed medical report if he thinks that in this stage medical expert statement to be recorded than he will call to medical expert and without dispose maintenance application my petition will be disposed and voidable marriage decree will be passed.




Please do not remain under the impression that under VOID or voidable marriage you can eascape your liabilities.if your spouse is destitute and you have income.

CompelledToLearnLaw (Financial Examiner)     28 March 2015

Kashyap, did u mean to say that the next court date, the judge gave, is in five months? That’s unheard of. Or did u mean the judge has been giving long dates during the past five months?


I’m pretty sure that Adv. Chandrasekhar did not anywhere say that the judge will dispose of ur case before disposing the maintenance application. I usually log into to see how cases proceed and in my area, it seems the judges can chew gum and walk at the same time: both hma24 and the original case proceed side by side. If ur wife wants to proceed with HMA 24 first, she may have the right as I’ve run into many judgements that say that HMA 24 petition needs to be disposed of first before proceeding further in the original case. But it depends on how gutsy ur wife is because she can easily damage her defense by waiting while she unsuccessfully contends that her HMA 24 application be disposed first.


My own inlaws did not agree for MCD and they r after a big alimony now plus a big pendette lite amount. Even though I’ve already given them close to 20 lakhs unconditionally plus about eight or nine lakhs of our gold she already has from us. So I was researching the same stuff and I found these judgments in the favour of HMA 24:


Pramod Saigal vs Amrita Sanghi on 11 October, 2013


5. The main contention of Ms.Anu Narula, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/husband, is that in view of the settled law when the application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for grant of maintenance and litigation expenses is pending, the court cannot compel the petitioner/applicant to file the written statement unless an order is passed in the said application. Thus, according to her the petitioner is expected to file the written statement only after the amount is paid to the petitioner. She referred to a large number of judgments in support of her contentions. It is not necessary to discuss all the judgments because of the reason that I am of the view that each case depends upon its own circumstances.

6. No doubt, in impracticable circumstances of the applicant in the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, I agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that the court cannot insist the applicant to file the written statement unless the litigation expenses are deposited. However, in case such situation is not available in a particular case then the court can pass the order for filing the written statement in the matter of divorce filed by one of the parties.


Sau. Vanita Pravin Gaikwad vs Sadguru Nagar on 30 September, 2009


12. On this aspect there is one more relevant decision in the case of Vanmala w/o. Maroti Hatkar vs. Maroti Sambhaji Hatkar (1999 (2) Mh.L.J. 297). This was a case where the husband committed default in complying with the order of interim alimony and payment of expenses passed under Section 24 of the said Act. This Court held that in such a contingency, if the offending party is the petitioner, the proceedings of the Petition can be ordered to be stayed. If the offending party is respondent, then the defence of the respondent can be struck out. Thus if compliance is not made by a Petitioner with an order passed under section 24 of the said Act, the proceedings of the Petition can be stayed. Thus, the law laid down by this Court is that unless an application made by the respondent for grant of litigation expenses is decided, the respondent is not even expected to file written statement. If such application is decided in favour of the respondent, it is not expected of the respondent to file the written statement unless order granting litigation expenses is complied with.



Vanmala W/O Maroti Hatkar vs Maroti Sambhaji Hatkar on 13 April, 1999


10. In the instant case, the Matrimonial Court should have adopted positive approach and ought to have compelled the petitioner husband to deposit the arrears of interim alimony and the expenses of the proceedings in the Court within specified time limit and on his failure, the learned Matrimonial Court could have stayed the very petition for divorce for non compliance of the order passed under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, provided the act of the husband is deliberate.



Meena Deshpande vs Prakash Shriniwas Deshpande on 15 February, 1983


2. In the entire proceedings excepting para 5 of the trial Court's judgment it does not appear that there was any consideration bestowed upon the entitlement of such wife to seek maintenance pendente lite and the expenses of the proceedings for which proper application was filed supported by the affidavit as available at Exs. 11 and 12. Without deciding such an application, it is indeed difficult to permit the passing of such exparte judgment only because the written statement is not filed, particularly when the allegations on the basis of which relief of nullity and divorce are sought ate serious enough and, before they are accepted, required sufficient and adequate proof. In such matters, looking to the policy of law, it must be observed that the proceedings under Section 24 of the Act have an important bearing with regard to the rights of the defending spouse. Not only the provisions of Section 24 of the Act permit grant of maintenance pendente lite, but also it permits the Court to make an order with regard to necessary expenses of the proceedings. In a given case without provision for the necessary expenses of the proceedings, it would be impracticable to insist upon the defending spouse even to file a written statement. The trial Court, which was bound to decide the application with regard to the maintenance and the expenses. There is, thus, obvious failure to follow the provisions of Section 24 of the Act, and that should be enough to set aside the judgment under appeal and remit the matter back to the trial Court directing it to consider the application filed at Ex. 11 supported by Ex. 12 and then to proceed with the enquiry in the petition according to law.


kashyap (abc)     28 March 2015

Dear Sir,

i don't have problem to pay maintenance first judge has to decide how much amount have i to pay the respondent.

my concern is that why is judge not proceeding. being an judge he ought to proceed expeditely it is not matter wether my or respondent favour. 




Without reasons no judge will wantedly keep giving long dates. I have gone through the views of the others above, Are U sure UR lawyer is competent enough to deal the case. If UR lawyer strongly protests for speedy trail there would not have been delay.Settle the matter in the lower court only instead of running after HC, where the success ratio  is only 30%.

kashyap (abc)     12 April 2015

Dear Senior

Medical of board Report says that respondent is fit for medically but she can not bear child absence of uterus, reproductive (menstrual cycle) she can have biological child.

can i get nullity decree under section 12(1)a in the absence of uterus and menstrual cycle.

please give any supreme court judgement if available.

Thanks &  Regards


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  

Related Threads