High Courts

K.L.A. Payne vs A.A. Payne

Madras High Court · Decided on 10 January 1922 · Citation: AIR 1922 Mad 350 : (1922) 16 LW 16 : (1922) 42 MLJ 562

ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Divorce Act, 1869 — Section 17
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 432 words
1.

This case comes to this Court under S 17 of the Indian Divorce Act of 1869 under which every decree nisi for dissolution of marriage made by

a District Judge shall be subject to confirmation by the High Court.

2.

The District Judge of Coimbatore made a decree nisi for the dissolution of marriage on 25th January 1921. u/s 7 of the Act, the District Courts

and High Courts, in all suits and proceedings under the Act, act and give relief on principles and rules which in the opinion of the said courts are as

nearly as may be conformable to the principles and rules on which the Court for Divorce and Matrimonial Causes in England for the time being

acts and gives relief. In this case we are not satisfied that the respondent was ever in fact served with a petition for divorce. As far as we can see, it

was stated by the petitioner that the respondent''s last known address was care of Messers. Cox & Co., Bankers in London; and it would appear

that a registered letter was despatched containing the petition to that address. There does not seem to be any evidence before the District Court

and certainly there is no evidence before us, that that registered letter was received by Messrs Cox & Co.- though probably it was-or that it was

handed over by them to the addressee the respondent. We have no evidence that the respondent was in England at that time or as to what has

happened.

3.

Secondly, the District Judge, as far we can see from the records, acted on the uncorroborated testimony of the petitioner both in respect of the

charge of adultery and of the charge of cruelty, It is quite contrary to the existing practice or I should say to the principles and rules on which the -

Court for Divorce and Matrimonial causes in England acts and gives relief, to act on the uncorroborated testimony of a petitioner either to establish

adultery or to establish cruelty.

4.

On these grounds we cannot see our way to confirm the decree nisi made by the District Judge. Notice of this judgment, which had better be

given by a copy of it being forwarded should be sent to the petitioner at the address that she has given herself viz., care of Mrs. Johnstone 144,

Bedford Hill, Balham London S.W. 12. If she is so advised she may take further steps in the matter.

5.

We refuse on the facts at present before us to confirm the order of the District Judge.