IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

MAT. APPEAL NO. OF 2012

IN THE MATTER OF

SH. AJAY KUMAR WADHWA

S/O SH. VED MITTER WADHWA
R/O H. NO. B-602, JOY KUNJ APARTMENTS,
PLOT NO. GH-29, SECTOR-56,
GURGAON, HARYANA ……….. APPELLANT/PETITIONER

VERSUS

SMT. CHANCHAL WADHWA

W/O SH. AJAY KUMAR WADHWA
D/O SH. DHARAM CHAND BATRA
R/O WZ- 385, VILLAGE TIHAR,
NEW DELHI - 110018. …………. RESPONDENT

FIRST APPEAL UNDER SECTION 28 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955

READ WITH ORDER XLI RULE 1 & 2 CPC AGAINST ORDER,
JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.07.2012 PASSED BY SH.
KAMLESH KUMAR LD. ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURT, ROHINI, DELHI IN H.M.A. NO. 26/10 TITLED “AJAY KUMAR
WADHWA VS. CHANCHAL WADHWA”

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH

1. That the present appeal is directed against the judgement and decree dated
06.07.2012 passed by Sh. Kamlesh Kumar Ld. Additional Principal Judge,
Family Court, Rohini, Delhi in H.M.A. No. 26/10 titled “Ajay Kumar
Wadhwa vs. Chanchal Wadhwa” wherein the petition filed by the
appellant/petitioner under Section 13 (I) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
for dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce on the grounds of
cruelty has been dismissed by the Ld. Trial Court. The certified copy of the
impugned order and judgement dated 06.07.2012 is annexed herewith and
marked as Annexure A-1.

2. That the brief facts which have lead the appellant to file the present appeal
are as follows:
3. That the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized
according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at Community Centre, Tihar Jail,
New Delhi on 23.08.2001. The appellant and the respondent even went to
Hong Kong for their honeymoon and all the expenses thereof were borne by
the appellant.

4. That at the time of marriage, both the parties were employed. While the
appellant was working as Branch Manager, Jetways Travels (P) Ltd., 402,
DLF City, Phase - IV, Gurgaon, Haryana-122002, the respondent was
working as an Additional Stenographer in the District & Sessions Court,
Delhi. Out of the said wed lock between the parties one daughter, namely Ms.
Jahnavi was born on 01.02.2003.

5. That soon after the marriage the appellant noticed that the respondent is a
short tampered lady. The respondent’s behaviour had not been good towards
the appellant. She used to quarrel frequently on very petty matters without
any just cause or reason. After such quarrels, the respondent used to leave her
matrimonial house and remained away for days and sometimes even for
months together, despite the fact that the appellant used to take care of her to
the best of his ability and means. Even when the child was born at St.
Stephens Hospital, the respondent gave her address of her parental home
when she had gone for her delivery as she had been staying at her parental
home at that time.

6. That the appellant had taken the respondent and their minor daughter for
pleasure trips to various places including foreign countries, the details of
some of them are as under:-

(i) To Bangkok - from 24th Sept. 04 to 27th Sept. 04

(ii) To Singapore - from 8th June, 05 to 12th June, 05.

(iii) To Hongkong - from 7th June, 06 to 10th June, 06

(iv) To Indonesia - from 4th April, 08 to 8th April, 08.

Besides these foreign trips, the appellant had also taken his wife/respondent
and his daughter to various tourist places in India like Shimla, Mussorrie,
Hardwar, Agra, Goa etc. The appellant incurred all expenses for the trips and
 shopping made by the parties during these trips. The respondent never
bothered to even contribute towards the day to day expenses to run the
household and all the expenses towards the same had been met with by the
appellant alone, despite the fact that the respondent was also earning. It is
also pertinent to mention here that at the time of marriage, the appellant had
been living with his parents at E-105, Tagore Garden Extn., New Delhi-
110027. However, after the marriage the appellant along with his wife had
shifted to a new house at C-2/40, West Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi-110034.
Despite all the love and affection bestowed by the appellant and his
commitment towards the institution of marriage, the respondent used to
quarrel on very petty matters without any just cause or reason and after such
quarrels, used to leave the matrimonial house and remain at her parental
house for days together and as stated above, sometimes even for months. The
respondent would stay away without even bothering or caring to as to how
the appellant would manage the house and the minor child on his own
without his wife.

7. That a female child i.e. baby Jahnavi was born to the parties on 01.02.2003.
The delivery of the child took place at St. Stephens Hospital. The appellant
and his parents had taken care of the respondent and while the appellant had
been bringing breakfast for her, the appellant’s parents had been looking after
and taking care of the respondent at the hospital. Sometimes, when the
appellant was late in bringing the meals of the respondent at the hospital even
by 10-15 minutes, the respondent would get wild and would shout and abuse
at the appellant and his parents. The said behaviour of the respondent
shocked the appellant and his parents.

8. That since both the parties were employed, the appellant used to leave his
daughter to his parent’s house while going to his office. The parents of the
appellant looked after the child during the entire day. The respondent, instead
of going to her in-laws house to look after the child after office, used to go to
the house of her own parents. The appellant after his office duty used to first
pick up the respondent and then used to take the minor child from his parent’s
house and thereafter return to the matrimonial house. Such a routine
continued for years together. The respondent never bothered about the
hardship and sufferings of the appellant or that of the minor child. She was
not concerned either about the well being of their child or to provide the love
and affection as a mother.
9. That despite all these difficult times, hardships and sufferings, the appellant
had been making best endeavors for managing and maintaining his family.
However, in the year 2007 when the appellant and the respondent had gone to
visit a mall, the respondent received a missed call on her mobile telephone.
After seeing the number, the respondent became nervous and immediately
ran to a garment’s shop and entered the trial room wherein she deleted the
number from her mobile phone. When the appellant enquired as to what had
happened, she gave an evasive reply. The appellant, not knowing anything at
that time, did not take the matter seriously. A few days thereafter the
appellant wanted to talk to the respondent and tried to contact her on mobile,
but her mobile phone was busy for quite a long time. When the appellant was
ultimately able to contact the respondent and questioned casually as to with
whom she was talking to, the respondent avoided to answer and instead gave
evasive replies. The respondent on reaching home even destroyed the sim
card of her mobile phone, for reasons best known to her. The appellant can
even prove through the evidence of the service provider, i.e. Vodafone that
the respondent got her sim card re-issued a on a number of occasions.

11. That on 05.08.2008 the respondent crossed all her limits of anger and
behaviour when she tried to lit up the curtains and the sofa in the house
without any cause or excuse. This behaviour of the respondent shocked the
appellant and caused a serious concern about his life and the safety and
security of the minor child. The appellant had made a video footage of the
aforesaid act and conduct of the respondent from his personal mobile phone.

12. That on 20.08.2008, the respondent deserted the appellant without any just
cause or excuse and went to her maternal house. The respondent took away
some of her clothes. The respondent left the matrimonial home when the
appellant was at his office. On reaching home, when the appellant came know
of the said fact, he went to his in–laws house to take the respondent back. Not
only the respondent refused to return with the appellant but also abused him.
The appellant was thus forced to live alone with his minor daughter and take
case of her single handedly.

13. That after some time, the respondent and his brother started threatening the
appellant. Being left with no alternative and seeing that his family life was in
serious jeopardy, the appellant lodged a complaint to the Hon’ble Chief
 Justice of Delhi High Court and also to the Hon’ble District & Sessions
Judge, Delhi with copies to the Police Stations Mangol Puri and Hari Nagar
on 19/20.08.2008. The said complaints are still under consideration with the
concerned authorities.

14. That on 18.11.2008, the appellant had to travel abroad to Europe in

connection with his official work. As such, the appellant had to leave behind
his minor daughter at his parent’s house to look after the minor child in the
absence of the appellant. As an abundant caution, the appellant had intimated
the Rajouri Garden Police Station about the same so as to avoid any untoward
incident in the absence of the appellant.

15. That the respondent somehow came to know that the appellant has gone
abroad. Taking undue advantage of the absence of the appellant, the
respondent had entered the house of the parents of the appellant on
24.11.2008 and forcibly took the custody of the minor child (Jahnavi). The
police was informed of the said action of the respondent, who even recorded
the statement of the respondent in this regard. Later on when the appellant
returned, the respondent left the minor daughter at the parental house of the
appellant.

16. That on 16.01.2009, the appellant had to again travel abroad to Australia in
connection with his official work. As such, the appellant had to leave his
minor daughter with his parents. The respondent again taking undue
advantage of the absence of the appellant took away the minor daughter,
Jahnavi to her maternal house. The matter was reported to the Police by the
father of the appellant on 17.01.2009 at P.S. Rajouri Garden.

17. That ever since then, the respondent has not allowed the appellant to meet his
daughter. The appellant tried to meet his daughter on 26th January 2009,
however, he was not allowed to do so by the respondent. Later on, even in
March, 2009 when the appellant again tried to meet his minor daughter, the
brother of the respondent manhandled the appellant and physically assaulted
him. On another occasion again the appellant tried to meet his daughter, the
respondent and her family members not only did not allow the appellant to
meet his minor daughter but also abused and manhandled him. Not only that,
the mother of the respondent even tore off the clothes of the appellant. The
 appellant was thus constrained to report the matter to the police on
09.04.2009.

18. That the respondent, her brother and other in-laws of the appellant had been
threatening the appellant of dire consequences in case the appellant came to
meet his minor child. On few occasions, the respondent had been stating that
she was willing to divorce the appellant subject to payment of ` 10,00,000/-
(Rupees Ten Lacs only) and for handing over the custody of the minor
daughter to the appellant. The said actions of the respondent not only caused
mental shock to the appellant but also shows that the respondent is only
interested in money. The respondent has ruined the life of the appellant and
that of the minor daughter. It is not out of place to mention here that despite
the fact that the respondent has the custody of the minor daughter, Jahnavi
since 16.01.2009, the entire school fee and other expenses are being met by
the appellant.

19. That the acts, conduct and behaviour of the respondent amounts to mental
and physical cruelty to the appellant. It would not be out of place to mention
here that the appellant came to know that the conduct and behaviour of the
respondent is not good even at her work place as she has received numerous
show cause notices and charge sheets for her misconduct and mis-behaviour.

20. That the respondent had deserted the appellant w.e.f. 20.08.2008. without any
just cause or excuse. By the acts and conduct of the respondent it had become
impossible for the appellant to live together with the respondent.

21. That from the acts and conduct of the respondent as mentioned above, it is
evident that the respondent was also involved with the person named Mr.
Jitender Mishra. The respondent had even confessed that she had been in a
relationship with the said Mr. Jitender Mishra before the appellant. The
respondent had thus not only caused mental torture to the appellant but also
ruined his life and the life of the minor daughter. The respondent had no right
to play with the life of the appellant and cheat him. The respondent had
always treated the appellant with utmost cruelty and had deserted the
appellant w.e.f. 20.08.2008 without any just cause or reason.

22. That in view of the above, it was evident that marriage between the parties
had irretrievably broken down and it was not possible for the parties to live
together as husband and wife. Under these circumstances, the appellant filed
 a petition under Section 13(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for
dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. In the said petition, the
petitioner/appellant revealed inter alia all the aforesaid acts of cruelty
inflicted by the respondent on the appellant. The copy of the petition along
with the documents filed by the petitioner/appellant are collectively annexed
herewith and marked as Annexure A-2 (Colly).

23. That in response to the petition filed by the appellant, the respondent wife
filed her written statement/reply wherein she baldly denied the averments
made in the petition and in order to covers up her own faults and deeds
blamed the appellant instead. The copies of the written statement/reply and
documents filed by the respondent are collectively annexed herewith and
marked as Annexure A-3 (Colly). Bare perusal of the reply and averments/
allegations made in the reply shows that the same are bald assertions which
have not been substantiated with any supporting documents. The appellant in
turn filed his replication reiterating the averments made in the petition and
exposing the bald allegations of the respondent. A copy of the replication
filed by the petitioner/appellant is annexed herewith and marked as
Annexure A-4.

24. That after completion of the pleadings and framing of issues the
appellant/petitioner lead his evidence and also examined witnesses in support
of his case. The copies of the examination-in-chief and cross examination of
all appellant/petitioner’s witnesses have been collectively annexed herewith
and marked as Annexure A-5 (Colly).

25. That after the appellant/petitioner’s evidence was over, the respondent in
order to avoid being confronted with the contents of her telephonic
confessions and videos which were on judicial record chose not to lead any
evidence. The audio and video CD’s were duly placed on record on the Ld.
Trial Court which was duly exhibited as Ex. PW-1/6 and PW-1/7. A copy of
the same is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure A-6 (colly). Later on,
even the audio transcript of the same was placed on record of the Ld. Trial
Court and the copy of the same alongwith the true translated copy is annexed
herewith and marked as Annexure A-7. Under these circumstances, the
appellant was left with no other alternative to prove the contents of the audio
and video recordings contained in the compact discs but to send the same to
 CFSL for an expert opinion on the same. The appellant therefore moved an
application under Section 151 CPC for seeking an expert opinion and for
verification of the contents of the compact discs i.e. Ex. PW-1/6 and PW-1/7.
A copy of the aforesaid application filed by the appellant is annexed herewith
and marked as Annexure A-8. The Ld. Additional Family Judge vide order
dated 06.06.2012 dismissed the said application filed by the appellant and
posted the matter for final arguments. A copy of the order dated 06.06.2012 is
annexed herewith and marked as Annexure A-9. The appellant even filed
copies of the complaint filed by the appellant against Shri Jitender Kumar
Mishra, Ld. Civil Judge. The copies of the same were duly placed on record
during the cross-examination of the appellant and the same are annexed
herewith and marked as Annexure A-10 (Colly). Thereafter the matter was
accordingly argued without any respondent’s evidence. The Ld. Trial Court
without appreciating the fact that the respondent had not lead any evidence
and in the absence of the same her averments (made in written statement)
cannot be read, gave precedence to the case set up by the respondent and
ignored all evidence put forth by the appellant. Not only this, the Ld. Judge
formed his own opinion on the basis of unsubstantiated averments and
without application of judicious mind and in a highly arbitrary manner vide
order dated 06.07.2012 dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner.
Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 06.07.2012 the appellant has filed
the present appeal on the following amongst other grounds:

GROUNDS

A. Because the impugned order dated 06.07.2012 is ex-facie illegal, arbitrary

and contrary to the material placed on record and evidence adduced by the
appellant.

B. Because bare perusal of the impugned order dated 06.07.2012 reveals that the
same is replete with the personal opinion of the Ld. Additional Family Judge
and even the said personal opinion has been applied in partial manner which
could best suit the interest of the respondent.

C. Because while passing the impugned order the Ld. Additional Family Judge
has failed to apply his judicious mind and has not followed the provisions of
the Evidence Act which prescribe a particular mode to proving the averments,
documents and the evidence which has to be considered pursuant to its proof
in accordance with law. The Ld. Judge has given a go bye to the entire legal
 provision and has relied upon bald averments and allegations made by the
respondent, over and above the facts which had been duly proved by the
appellant by leading evidence. The entire impugned order dated 06.07.2012 is
thus vitiated with illegality and is liable to be set aside.

D. Because while passing the impugned order the Ld. Additional Family Judge
has failed to appreciate that the appellant had placed on record copies of the
complaints of the appellant against Shri Jitender Kumsr Mishra, Ld. Civil
Judge filed before the Ld. District Judge and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court,
which were duly exhibited as Ex. PW-1/D3 and Ex. PW-1/D4.

E. Because bare perusal of the manner in which reliance has been placed on the
averments of the respondent, ignoring the duly proved facts of the case by the
appellant and opinion formed on the basis of the bald averments, applying
different yardsticks while forming opinion on the same issues, itself smells of
a biased approach adopted by the Ld. Additional Family Judge. The
impugned order dated 06.07.2012 thus cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.

F. Because while deciding the issue pertaining to expenses made by the

appellant on trips abroad, the Ld. Additional Family Judge (in para 49) has
wrongly held that the petitioner/appellant has failed to disprove the claim of
the respondent that she had spent money on shopping. The Ld. Judge failed to
appreciate that first the onus to prove that the respondent had spent on
shopping was on the respondent, which she miserably failed to prove. It was
only once the respondent could have proved the same that the onus to
disprove the same would have shifted to appellant/petitioner. On the contrary,
the appellant had duly proved the fact of incurring expenses for the trip by
summoning witnesses from the bank and demonstrating that the expenses
towards getting the foreign currency were borne by the appellant vide exhibit
Ex. PW-1/2, Ex. PW-1/3 and Ex. PW-1/4. The Ld. Additional Family Judge
totally ignored the vital evidence and passed the impugned order dated
06.07.2012.

G. Because the Ld. Additional Family Judge adopted a biased approach while
deciding the issues between the parties. The Ld. Judge on the one hand held
that the act of the petitioner in checking bags of the respondent (which goes
unsubstantiated), checking her mobile phone etc. shows his behaviour and
 conduct. On the other hand the Ld. Judge did not form any opinion on the
conduct of the respondent in giving address of her parents in Insurance
Policies and bank account and further making her mother as nominee in the
said account even after her marriage and the birth of the child. The said act
shows the conduct of the respondent and reveals that even she did not repose
faith, trust and confidence in institution of marriage and her husband even
when there were no disputes/differences between parties. The impugned
judgement dated 06.07.2012 is thus vitiated with partiality.

H. Because the Ld. Trial Court has failed to appreciate and misconstrued the
evidence led by the appellant to assume that the parties had cohabited during
their trip abroad to Indonesia in April 2008, despite the fact that the appellant
had categorically denied the same.

I. Because even the personal opinion formed by the Ld. Additional Family
Judge is based on incorrect facts and evidence on record. In para 51 of the
impugned order the Judge has held that since the respondent had to commute
by public transport it was not so convenient for her to reach the house of
petitioner’s parents (at Tagore Garden) and found it more convenient to reach
her own parental house (at Tilak Nagar). While coming to the said conclusion
the Ld. Judge failed to appreciate that while commuting from Tis Hazari the
house of petitioner’s parent was much closer than her parental house and
visiting house of appellant’s parents would have been much easier and
convenient for the respondent. Moreover, the Ld. Judge has formed his own
opinion by observing that “obviously there would have been some reason as
to why the respondent was not keen to visit his parental house”. Thus the
impugned order dated 06.07.2012 is an outcome of conjectures and surmises
of the Ld. Additional Family Judge and is therefore liable to be set aside.

J. Because the Ld. Additional Family Judge has blindly relied upon the
averments of the respondent about his (petitioner’s) conduct with the
respondent without appreciating the fact that those averments/allegations had
not been proved by the respondent. The respondent had lead no evidence i.e.
even she did not appear in the witness box to prove whether the appellant
used to check her bags and the other allegations levelled by the respondent
about the conduct of the appellant with the respondent (as has been observed
by the Ld. Judge in para 54 and 55 of the impugned judgement). Again the
 Ld. Judge has formed his own opinion on the basis of bald allegations and
averments which have not been proved by the respondent.

K. Because the Ld. Additional Family Judge formed his own opinion regarding
objective of the petitioner/appellant in recording of the calls and taking video
of the respondent (in para 57 of the impugned judgement). The Ld. Judge
failed to appreciate that the purpose of filing the audio/video recording was to
demonstrate the conduct and behaviour of the respondent. Nothing in
piecemeal was recorded to draw any far fetched conclusion as opined by the
Ld. Trial Court. As a matter of fact, the video recorded by the appellant was
from his mobile phone, which records clips only upto 20 seconds each. In
fact whatever was recorded was a direct admission and revealed the conduct
of the respondent. As regards the audio recording the same was in continuity
and the same were ignored by the Ld. Trial Court without any reason,
whatsoever. The Ld. Judge with the sole intention to discredit the evidence
adduced by the appellant had drawn his own opinion regarding objective of
the appellant in video recordings and thereafter had drawn an adverse
inference about the nature and attitude of the appellant.

L. Because the Ld. Additional Family Judge on the one hand has applied strict
rule of evidence regarding the mode and manner of proving the CDs (in para
59 of the impugned judgement) placed on record by the petitioner/appellant,
not leading any evidence to prove his (petitioner’s) insult before his
colleagues and clients (para 66 of the impugned judgement). On the other
hand the Ld. Judge considered and took into account all averments and
allegations made by the respondent despite the fact that no evidence was lead
by the respondent to prove the same. Thus, the impugned judgement dated
06.07.2012 is untenable in law and is liable to be set aside on this ground
alone.

M. Because the arbitrariness of the Ld. Judge in passing the impugned judgement
dated 06.07.2012 can be ascertained from the fact that in para 67 of the
impugned judgement the Ld. Judge has observed that the record reveals that
the petitioner has leveled bald allegations against the respondent. The Ld.
Judge held that the appellant could have examined his father or mother or
brother or brother’s wife to show that wife’s brother to show that the
appellant’s brother-in-law (respondent’s brother) had quarreled with the
 appellant. The Ld. Judge failed to appreciate that the said quarrel had taken
place at the house of the respondent’s parents when the appellant had visited
them alone. After the incident the appellant had even made a complaint to the
police, which is already on the judicial record. Therefore, the examination of
the appellant’s family members, who were not even present at the parental
house of the respondent, would have been inconsequential. On the basis of
the aforesaid observation, the Ld. Judge ignored the incidence allegedly for
the want of evidence. It would be pertinent to mention here that the entire
case of respondent was based on bald allegations which she could not prove
by leading any evidence and even that ought to have been rejected by the Ld.
Judge for lack of evidence. However, the same was not done, which in itself
speaks of the illegality in the impugned order dated 06.07.2012.

N. Because on the one hand the Ld. Judge held that the conduct of the
petitioner/appellant in checking the mobile phone of the respondent shows his
nature of casting doubts on respondent and on the basis of the same formed
various untenable observations about appellant and passed impugned
judgement against the petitioner. On the other hand, the Ld. Judge maintained
silence on the conduct of the respondent in relying upon a photograph of the
petitioner, dancing on a trip with Ms. Deepa Saha and the respondent was
admittedly not present on the said trip (para 73 of the impugned judgement).
The Ld. Judge did not form an opinion as to how did the respondent came
across the said photograph, but by spying on the petitioner/appellant. A copy
of the photograph is being filed as Annexure A-11 and the same would
demonstrate that the observations of the Ld. Trial Court are erroneous. On the
basis of his incorrect opinion, the Ld. Judge drew an inference about the
conduct of the appellant (para 74 of the impugned judgement). The Ld. Judge
had thus formed biased opinion which could best suit case of the respondent.

O. Because the ld. Judge came to an erroneous conclusion that the petitioner had
condoned the acts of the respondent. In fact, as stated above, the petitioner
had all along been making efforts to save his matrimonial house and thus did
not raise any issues. It was only when all efforts made by the appellant had
failed that he had filed the petition seeking decree of divorce. However, the
acts of the respondent could not be said to have been condoned the cruelty
inflicted upon the appellant by the respondent. Therefore, observation made
 by the Ld. Judge in this regard is highly misconceived and the impugned
order dated 06.07.2012 is liable to be set aside.

P. Because the Ld. Trial Court has misconstrued the evidence of the appellant to
observe that the appellant had condoned the acts of cruelty of the respondent
by living as husband and wife even after the acts of cruelty committed by the
respondent.

Q. Without prejudice to the above the impugned order and judgement dated
06.07.2012, dismissing the petition filed by the appellant is perverse, bad in
law and is therefore liable to be set aside.

26. That the aforesaid grounds are without prejudice to each other and the
appellant craves leave of this Hon’ble Court to amend or add any other
ground at a later stage.

27. That the impugned order was passed by the Ld. ADJ on 06.07.2012. The
certified copy of the same applied by the appellant on 13.07.2012 and the
same was received on 09.08.2012. The present appeal is thus within
limitation.

28. That the appropriate court fee of ` 150/- has been affixed on the appeal.

29. That the documents annexed with the present appeal form the part of record
filed by the appellants before the Trial Court.

30. That the appellants have not preferred any other appeal against the impugned
order dated 06.07.2012 before any other court or before the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India.
PRAYERS

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances it is most respectfully prayed that
this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to

a) call for the trial court records; and

b) set aside the impugned order and judgement dated 06.07.2012 passed by Sh.
Kamlesh Kumar Ld. Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohini,
 Delhi in H.M.A. No. 26/10 titled “Ajay Kumar Wadhwa vs. Chanchal
Wadhwa”; and

c) dissolve the marriage between the appellant and the respondent by a decree
of divorce under Section 13 (i) (a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; and

d) award costs in favour of the appellant and against the respondent; and

e) pass such other or further order(s) this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper in
the facts and circumstances of the present case.

New Delhi APPELLANT

Dated: THROUGH
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MAT. APPEAL NO. OF 2012

IN THE MATTER OF

SH. AJAY KUMAR WADHWA ……….. APPELLANT

VERSUS

SMT. CHANCHAL WADHWA …………. RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT
I, Ajay Kumar Wadhwa S/o Sh. Ved Mitter Wadhwa, aged about 39 years, resident
of H. No. B-602, Joy Kunj Apartments, Plot No. GH-29, Sector-56, Gurgaon,
Haryana presently at New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:

1. That I am the appellant in the aforesaid appeal and as such am conversant

with the facts of the case and am competent to swear the present affidavit.

2. That the accompanying appeal against the impugned order dated 06.07.2012
has been drafted by the counsel under my instructions. The contents of the
appeal have been read and duly understood by me and the same are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge.

3. That the annexures filed with the appeal form the part of Trial Court record.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of October 2012 that the contents of paras 1
to 3 of the aforesaid affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge. No part of it is
false and nothing has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT