Gulshan Kumari vs Bansi Lal

Harjit Singh Bedi, J.—An application u/s 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act was dismissed vide order dated 1st August, 1980 as not pressed by the learned Counsel for the applicant petitioner and also because the petitioner i.e. applicant before that Court did not adduce any evidence regarding the possession and ownership of the property mentioned in the list annexed with the application. This order has been impugned before this Court on the ground that some fraud had been committed against the petitioner as she had not instructed the Counsel not to press the application.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Admittedly, the application was dismissed on two grounds (i) as not being pressed and (ii) that no evidence had been adduced in support of the application. Moreover, the dispute pertains to the year 1980 and it is conceded by the learned Counsel for the parties that the parties had since divorced and the petitioner had also got re-married in October, 1980.

For the reasons recorded above, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed but with no order as to costs.