Allahabad High Court Upholds Rejection of Additional Issues in Divorce Proceedings
Discretionary Powers of Trial Courts Affirmed in Case of Alleged Adultery by Respondent
In a significant decision, the Allahabad High Court has upheld the trial court's rejection of an application seeking the framing of additional issues in divorce proceedings between Dr. Madhu Singh Chaudhary and Dr. Atul Bharti. The case, which has drawn attention due to allegations of adultery, was addressed by Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi at the Lucknow Bench.
The appeal was filed by Dr. Madhu Singh Chaudhary, challenging the Family Court's decision dated July 7, 2025. The appellant sought the inclusion of additional issues in the divorce petition filed by her husband, Dr. Atul Bharti, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The core of the dispute revolved around allegations made by a third party, Shri Santosh Kumar, who claimed Dr. Bharti was involved in an adulterous relationship with a woman named Km. Seema Rawat.
The judgment emphasized the discretionary powers vested in trial courts under Order XIV of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The court reiterated that framing additional issues is contingent upon their necessity in determining the matter at hand. The trial court's decision was based on the principle that allegations from third-party objections do not automatically form the subject matter of divorce petitions.
Dr. Madhu Singh Chaudhary had not filed a counter-claim nor sought dissolution based on the alleged adulterous acts of Dr. Bharti. Instead, she filed an application under Order XIV, seeking the framing of additional issues based on third-party allegations. The High Court observed that such allegations did not constitute the subject matter of the divorce petition initiated by Dr. Bharti. Consequently, the trial court's rejection of her application was deemed appropriate.
The judgment also highlighted the procedural aspects under the Code of Civil Procedure, which require assertions and denials through pleadings for the formation of issues. The court asserted that the appellant's failure to challenge the issues framed in 2017 until 2025 weakened her position. Moreover, her pending petition for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, further complicated the matter.
The High Court's decision underscores the importance of procedural compliance and the discretionary powers of trial courts in family law matters. The dismissal of Dr. Madhu Singh Chaudhary's appeal affirms the trial court's judgment, emphasizing that allegations of adultery against the respondent/husband cannot be adjudicated in the current divorce proceedings.
Bottom Line:
Framing of additional issues in divorce proceedings based on third-party allegations is discretionary and depends on the relevance to the original subject matter of the case.
Statutory provision(s): Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Order XIV Rules 1, 2, 3, 4, 5), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Sections 9, 13), Family Courts Act, 1984 (Section 19(1))
Dr. Madhu Singh Chaudhary v. Dr. Atul Bharti, (Allahabad)(DB)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2790408
