True Copy of MATT. APPL. NO. 7 of 2012 before HIGH COURT of DELHI

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW-DELHI

MATT APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2012 IN THE MATTER OF: Om Prakash Poddar APPELLANT VS. Rina Kumari RESPONDENT

INDEX

SERIAL

NO.

PARTICULARS PAGE

NO.

1. Notice of Motion 1

2. Urgent Application 2

3. Memo of Parties 3

4. Synopsis with list of date and events 4-6

5. Appeal Under Section 28 of Hindu

Marriage Act 1955 along with affidavit

7-24

6. ANNEXURE A-1

Certified copy of impugned common

Order dated 16.12.2011 in HMA Case No.

678 of 2010.

25-32

7. ANNEXURE A-2 (colly)

True copies letters dated 25.11.2004,

20.6.2005, 7.8.2005 & 10.1.2008.

33-39

8. ANNEXURE A-3

True copy of the Petition Under Section

13 (1) (1a) of the HMA bearing H.M.A

Case No. 678 of 2010.

40-57


True copy of the police complaint dated

30.5.2011 and 6.6.2011

58-62

10. ANNEXURE A-5

True copy of Order dated 06.06.2011.

63

11. ANNEXURE A-6

True copy of Ex-parte evidence of

Appellant dated 01.08.2011.

64-66


True copies of Evidence by way of

Affidavit dated 27.08.2011 and

07.09.2011.

67-74

13. C.M. APPL NO. 2423 OF 2011

APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FOR

FILING CERTIFIED COPIES OF

ANNEXURE/ORDER UNDER SECTION

151 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE 1908

ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT.

75-77

14. Vakalatnama 78

THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT FILED ANY OTHER OR SIMILAR APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID ORDER DATED 16.12.2011 BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT OR ANY OTHER COURT.

Through Counsel

Jai Bansal Chamber No. 105,

New Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India

New Delhi – 110001 Mobile: 9868566649

Date: 03.02.2012 Place : New Delhi


MATT APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2012 IN THE MATTER OF: Om Prakash Poddar …APPELLANT VS. Rina Kumari …RESPONDENT

NOTICE OF MOTION SHRI Advocate Sir, The enclosed APPEAL Under Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act

1955 in the aforesaid matter as being filed on behalf of the

APPELLANT and is likely to be listed on __02.2012 or any date,

thereafter. Please take notice accordingly.

Through Counsel



New Delhi – 110001 Date:03.02.2012 Place : New Delhi



URGENT APPLICATION TO DEPUTY REGISTRAR HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI NEW DELHI SIR, Kindly treat the accompanying APPEAL Under Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955 as urgent one in accordance with Delhi High Court Rules. The ground of urgency as prayed in the prayer clause as mentioned in the instant Appeal and the prayer clause. Through Counsel



New Delhi – 110001 Date:03.02.2012 Place : New Delhi


MATT APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2012 IN THE MATTER OF: Om Prakash Poddar …APPELLANT VS. Rina Kumari …RESPONDENT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 28 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT 1955

AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.12.2011 PASSED

BY MR. DEEPAK JAGOTRA, JUDGE FAMILY COURTS,

DWARKA, DELHI IN PETITION UNDER SECTION 13(1)(1A) OF

THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 FOR DECREE OF DIVORCE

ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT IN HMA CASE NO. 678 OF 2010

MEMO OF PARTIES

Om Prakash Poddar S/o Late D.N Poddar, R/o RZF – 893, Netaji Subhas Marg Raj Nagar – II, Palam Colony New Delhi - 110077 APPELLANT VS. Rina Kumari W/o Sh. Om Prakash Poddar D/o Surendra Narayan Poddar, RC, Marketing Division, Indian Oil Corporation, Barauni Refinery, P.S. Barauni, Distt: Begusarai, Bihar RESPONDENT

THROUGH

Jai Bansal

ADVOCATE NEW-DELHI DATED: 03.02.2012

SYNOPSIS

That the instant Appeal is filed by the Appellant/husband

against the common Order dated 16.12.2011 passed by Mr. Deepak

Jagotra, Judge Family Courts, Dwarka, Delhi in Petition under

section 13(1)(1A) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for decree of

divorce on behalf of Appellant in HMA Case No. 678 of 2010

whereby the Ld. Trial court erred in holding that the Appellant has

failed to show even a single incident of alleged cruelty caused by the

Respondent, however passed a decree of Judicial separation on the

ground of desertion by the Respondent.

LIST OF DATE AND EVENTS

24.6.2004 Marriage between the Appellant and the

respondent was solemnized on 24.6.2004 at

(Katihar), Bihar with misrepresentation of bride

and forcibly under life threat.

- Soon after the marriage Respondent started

behaving with the Appellant in a violent, cruel,

disrespectful and oppressive manner.

Respondent started dominating and shouting on

the Appellant and when Appellant tries to calm

her down she says that she will seal his mouth

with tape, if he tries to stop her from shouting.

Respondent even started abusing and

complaining the Appellant that in her house at

Dhanbad even servants ate in better crockery and

humiliate the Appellant by saying that the house,

furniture and the other items and belongings are

fit only for servants which the Appellant been able

to arrange only after 12 years of honest hard work

or given by parents.

15.4.2005 Father of the Respondent came and took the

Respondent along with her to his Government

residence at Dhanbad (Bihar), now in Jharkhand.

Respondent gave birth to a female child at

Dhanbad on 20.5.2005 and never came back to

the matrimonial home. Respondent even did not

allowed the Petitioner to meet his only child. This

itself amounts to cruelty.

25.10.2010 Appellant filed a petition U/s 13 (1) (1a) of the

HMA, 1955 vide H.M.A Case No. 678 of 2010

seeking a decree of divorce before Family Courts,

Dwarka, Delhi without the knowledge of mal

intention of Respondent. Appellant has come to

know about the respondent’s mal intention on the

date of hearing of HMA suit no. 678/2010 on

9/02/2011

30 March 2010 Respondent with mal intention and to harass and

humiliate the Appellant filed false and frivolous

cases against the Appellant and his mother.

Respondent filed an application under section 12

of Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in June 2010

30.5.2011 Appellant was stopped and beaten by the goons

of the Respondent family at the entry gate of

Dwarka Court on the 30.5.2011. There after

Respondent never appeared before the Ld. Trial

Court.

06.06.2011 As a result of that the Respondent was being Ex-

parte by the Principal Judge, Ms Deepa Sharma.

07.09.2011 Date was fixed for coming up for ex-parte

evidence. However, case was transferred to the

Court of Mr. Deepak Jagotra’s Family court in

Dwarka.

16.12.2011 That the court of Mr. Deepak Jagotra, Judge

Family Courts, Dwarka, Delhi in H.M.A Case No.

678 of 2010 vide its Order erred in holding that

the Appellant has failed to show even a single

incident of alleged cruelty caused by the

Respondent, Appellant had produced four

witnesses but Appellant’s witnesses were being

negated on the ground of “identical statement”.

Further, his witnesses were being falsified and

blamed no legs to stand and thus baseless.

However, passed a decree of Judicial separation

on the ground of desertion by the Respondent,

which was not even prayed for

__.01.2012 Hence this Appeal.



LEGAL AID CASE AIDED BY THE DELHI HIGH COURT LEGAL AID COMMITTEE

APPEAL UNDER SECTION 28 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT

1955 AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.12.2011

PASSED BY MR. DEEPAK JAGOTRA, JUDGE FAMILY

COURTS, DWARKA, DELHI IN PETITION UNDER SECTION

13(1)(1A) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 FOR DECREE

OF DIVORCE ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT IN HMA CASE NO.

678 OF 2010.

To,

THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS

COMPANION LORDSHIPS, OF THE HON’BLE

HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the present Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant

interalia impugning the order dated 16.12.2011 passed by the Ld.

Principal Judge Family Courts, Dwarka, Delhi in Petition under


divorce on behalf of Appellant in HMA Case No. 678 of 2010.

Certified copy of impugned common Order dated 16.12.2011

passed in HMA Case No. 678 of 2010 is annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure A-1.

2. FACTS OF THE CASE:-

a) That the marriage between the Appellant and the respondent

was solemnized on 24.6.2004 at (Katihar), Bihar with

misrepresentation of bride and forcibly under life threat.

However, after solemnization of marriage, the marriage was

consummated and there was one female child born from

wedlock of the Respondent and appellant.

b) That after the marriage Appellant and the Respondent resided

at Sukkar Haat Sonaili, Kadwa Distt. Katihar, Bihar with the

famly of the Appellant till 18.7. 2004.

c) That immediately after the marriage, on 25.4.2004

Respondent started misbehaving with the Appellant, his father

and his mother. She started shouting at the top of her voice

even in front of relatives, friends and society creating

embarrassing situations for the Appellant and his family which

came as shocking incident for them. Respondent used to pick

up quarrel without any reason.

d) Thereafter, the Appellant along with the Respondent shifted to

a rented residence in New Delhi on 20.7.2004. Even after

shifting to Delhi, the behaviour of the Respondent remained

the same. The Respondent started behaving with the

Appellant in a violent, cruel, disrespectful and oppressive

manner. Respondent started dominating and shouting on the

Appellant and when Appellant tries to calm her down she says

that she will seal his mouth with tape, if he tries to stop her

from shouting. Respondent even started abusing and

complaining the Appellant that in her house at Dhanbad even

servants ate in better crockery and humiliate the Appellant by

saying that the house, furniture and the other items and

belongings are fit only for servants which the Appellant been

able to arrange only after 12 years of honest hard work or

given by parents.

e) It is humbly submitted that during their joint stay at the

matrimonial home, Respondent never took any interest in

doing any household work such as cooking, looking after the

house etc and therefore, Appellant had to do all the household

works. That the Appellant even has to leave his home some

times without eating anything if he was not able to cook

because of lack of time. Respondent used to wake up very

late, not to take morning baths, used to eat all the meals on

bed, have a bath in evening around 7-8 pm creating

unhygienic and an environment not possible to live in.

Respondent never used to listen to the Appellant and used to

pick up unnecessary quarrels, arguments and even

complaints of feeling embarrassed in sitting with the Appellant

and in going out and not even allowing the Appellant to sleep

properly after a whole day of hard work.

f) That the Respondent used to threaten the Appellant that if

the Appellant did not obey her instructions she would commit

suicide by taking poison and by implicating all the family

members in false criminal cases of dowry harassment.

g) That shockingly for the Appellant, one day father of the

Respondent called him and told him to ask for his share from

his parents so that Respondent could live a luxurious life. On

the refusal by the Appellant, Respondents and his family

members abused the Appellant and his family members.

h) That the Respondent used to dominate and object and

question his routine acts and academic pursuit such as

listening to music, exercising, taking over phone, pursuing

higher studies etc. Respondent and her family used to

threaten the Appellant stating that her family is very influential

in Begusarai (Bihar) of dire consequences and of getting him

and his family members arrested in false cases, if he would

not part his share with his family and hand it over to the

Respondent.

i) That the Respondent constantly used to threaten the

Appellant directly and indirectly through her friends and

colleagues, their spouses and domestic help that she will

destroy his career and reputation, if he will not listen and

succumb to her unjust demands and pressure.

j) That the Respondent also started terrorizing the Appellant by

suicide threats and getting him killed and to take over his all

his assets, money and other belongings and a result of the

state of affairs, Appellant was living a scared life full of threat

and started suffering with high blood pressure, mental and

physical stress, weight loss, insomnia. That due to the sad

state of affairs created by the Respondent, Appellant was not

able to go to his work and had lost his job and became

unemployed.

k) It is humbly submitted that due to the cruel, dominating,

threatening behaviour and acts of the Respondent, Appellant

was not able to live a normal relationship of husband and wife.

However, as a result of cohabitation, Respondent conceived.

During the advance stage of pregnancy, father of the

Respondent who is working as Assistant Manager (RC),

Marketing Division with Indian Oil Corporation, came on

15.4.2005 and took the Respondent along with her to his

Government residence at Dhanbad (Bihar), now in Jharkhand.

l) That the Respondent gave birth to a female child at Dhanbad

on 20.5.2005 and never came back and is residing with her

father at Q. No. RH – 5/6, Township Refinery, Baruni, Distt:

Begusarai. It is important to mention that the Respondent

even did not allowed the Appellant to meet his only child. This

itself amounts to mental cruelty on the part of the Respondent

towards the Appellant.

m) That the Appellant tried to calm her down by saying that the

matter needs to be resolved amicably and not through threats

and asked the Respondent and her family members to come

and live with the Appellant in the matrimonial home to which

the Respondent refused to live with the Appellant and his

family members for the reasons best known to her.

n) That the Appellant lost his father due to lack of care and

support and the threatening from the Respondent and her

family who was undergoing treatment at AIIMS and died on

15.11.2007. The Respondent and his family did not even

visited and participated in the last rituals of the Appellant’s

father. This is another example of mental cruelty on the part of

the Respondent towards the Appellant.

o) That the Appellant approached the Respondent many a times

but he was even denied of having access or to meet his only

daughter by the family members of the Respondent and

Respondent herself.

p) That during this period Appellant in order to call the

Respondent to join the matrimonial home written several

letters to the Respondent as well as her family members to

send the Respondent to join his company and also requested

to make the Respondent understand to mend her ways but

nothing affected to the dumb ears of the Respondent. True

copies letters dated 25.11.2004, 20.6.2005, 7.8.2005 &

10.1.2008 are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure

A- 2 (Colly).

q) That in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances

because of the unacceptable and unchanging acts and

behaviors of the Respondent and the threats and the acts

amounting to mental cruelty against the Appellant and his

family members which has made it impossible for the

Appellant to live with the Respondent.

r) That the Appellant being aggrieved by the conduct of the

Respondent in the matrimonial life filed a petition on

25.10.2010 Under Section 13 (1) (1a) of the HMA, 1955 vide

H.M.A Case No. 678 of 2010 seeking a decree of divorce on

the grounds of cruelty before Family Courts, Dwarka, Delhi.

True copy of the Petition Under Section 13 (1) (1a) of the

HMA bearing H.M.A Case No. 678 of 2010 is attached

herewith and marked as Annexure A-3.

s) That after filing the aforesaid divorce petition, Respondent

with sole intention and to harass and humiliate the Appellant

filed false and frivolous cases against the Appellant and his

mother. Respondent filed an application under section 12 of

Domestic Violence Act, 2005, on 30th March 2010.

t) That the Respondent’s family members kept on giving

constant life threat to the Appellant with dire consequences.

u) That the Appellant was stopped and beaten by the goons of

the Respondent family at the entry gate of Dwarka Court on

the 30.5.2011 which was the date of hearing. True copy of the

police complaint dated 30.5.2011 and 6.6.2011 is attached

herewith and marked as Annexure P- 4 (colly).

v) That after the first day of hearing Respondent never appeared

and in due process she was proceeded ex-parte by the Ld.

Trial Court on 06.06.2011. True copy of Order dated

06.06.2011 is attached herewith and marked as Annexure A-

5.

w) That the case was transferred to the court of Mr. Deepak

Jagotra, Judge Family Courts, Dwarka, Delhi and was

renumbered as H.M.A Case No. 678 of 2010.

x) That during the course of proceedings, Appellant led his

Evidence by way of Affidavit on 01.08.2011. True copy of Ex-

parte evidence of Appellant dated 01.08.2011 is attached

herewith and marked as Annexure A- 6.

y) That the Appellant in order to strengthen his case also led

the evidence of the his Mother – Asha Devi, Sister- Sneh Lata

and Friend – Digvijay Singh on 27.08.2011 and 07.09.2011.

True copies of Evidence by way of Affidavit dated 27.08.2011

and 07.09.2011 are attached herewith and marked as

Annexure A- 7 (colly).

z) That the Ld. Family Court vide its Order dated 16.12.2011

erred in holding that the Appellant has failed to show even a

single incident of alleged cruelty caused by the Respondent,

however passed a decree of Judicial separation on the ground

of desertion by the Respondent.

aa) That being aggrieved by the said Order dated 16.12.2011,

passed by the court of Mr. Deepak Jagotra, Judge Family

Courts, Dwarka, Delhi in H.M.A Case No. 678 of 2010,

Appellant is filing the instant Appeal.

3. GROUNDS

That the orders and judgment dated 16.12.2011 passed in HMA

No.678 of 2010 is being assailed by the Appellant on the

following amongst various other grounds:-

A) Because the impugned order and judgment dated

16.12.2011 passed by the court of Mr. Deepak Jagotra, Judge

Family Courts, Dwarka, Delhi in H.M.A Case No. 678 is bad in

the eyes of law and hence the same is liable to be struck

down by this Hon’ble Court.

B) Because the Respondent was Ex-parte in H.M.A Case No.

678/2010, yet the impugned order and judgment passed in

favor of Respondent.

C) Because the Court below committed a grave error in holding

that the Appellant has failed to show even a single incident of

alleged cruelty caused by the Respondent when in view of the

facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence

adduced clearly shows the brutal, unacceptable and

unchanging acts and behaviors of the Respondent and the

threats and acts amounting to mental cruelty against the

Appellant and his family members which has made it

impossible for the Appellant to live with the Respondent.

D) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to appreciate that refusing

the Appellant to meet his only daughter after birth itself

amounts to mental cruelty on the part of the Respondent and

towards the Appellant.

E) Because the Ld Trial court has failed to consider the crux of

the whole episode is based on two pillars i.e.

Forced/Fraudulent Marriage and Criminal conspiracy.

F) Because the Ld. Trial court failed to appreciate that

Respondent being the wife not visiting the Appellant, when his

father was on death bed and there after not participating in the

last rites of his father itself amounts to cruelty.

G) Because the Ld. Trial court has failed to asses the extent of

cruelty and failed to consider the evidence led before the Ld.

Trial Court.

H) Because the Ld Trial court failed to consider that the various

incidents as specified/narrated in the Petition as well as in the

evidence led before the Ld. Trial Court.

I) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to appreciate that the

Respondent was residing separately since 17.04.2005 and

there after there was no cohabitation between the parties

because of the desertion by the Respondent itself amounts to

cruelty.

J) Because the Ld. Trial Court despite holding that the

Respondent is not interested in continuing the matrimonial tie

with the Appellant has dismissed the Petition of the Appellant

by granting him a judicial separation.

K) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to consider that there is no

faith, trust, belief or any feeling existing between the parties

and as such it is impossible for them to live together as

husband and wife and the marriage is irretrievable broken

down between the parties.

L) Because the Ld . Trial court failed to consider that the

Appellant was always living a scare life about his physical

safety, health and life because of the constant threats of the

Respondents and his family members.

M) Because the Ld . Trial court failed to consider that the

Respondent tried her best to cause damage to the Appellant

and otherwise to the reputation of the Appellant and his family

members by constant threats of suicide, implicating in false

cases and causing intense mental and physical cruelty.

N) Because the Ld . Trial court failed to consider that

Respondent constantly used to dominate and threaten the

Appellant directly and indirectly through his friends and

colleagues, their spouses and domestic help that she will

destroy his career and reputation, is he will not listen and

succumb to her unjust demands and pressure

O) Because the Ld . Trial court failed to consider that

Respondent also used to terrorize the Appellant by suicide

threats and getting him killed and to take over his all his

assets, money and other belongings and a result of the state

of affairs, Appellant was living a scared life full of threat and

started suffering with high blood pressure, mental and physical

stress, weight loss, insomnia.

P) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to appreciate that due to

the said state of affairs created by the Respondent, Appellant

was not able to go to his work and has to loose his job and

became an unemployed and present undergoing severe

mental depression.

Q) Because the behavior and acts of the Respondent has

caused mental cruelty and trauma to the Appellant and his

family members.

R) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to appreciate that the

Respondent did not pay any attention to the desire/request of

the dying father of the Appellant to see the face of his only

grandchild.

S) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to consider that the

Respondent also used to threaten the Appellant that if the

Appellant did not obey her instructions or dared to intervene in

her personal matter, she would commit suicide by taking

poison and implicate them in false and frivolous cases.

T) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to consider that Appellant

has tried his best to carry on the relationship on his part but

the behavior of the Respondent has never changed towards

the Appellant and his family members.

U) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to appreciate that

Appellant and his family members always have to be

embarrassed in society due to the acts and quarrelsome

nature and behaviour of the Respondent and felt humiliated as

Respondent used to pick up quarrel in front of elders of the

family and the society creating humiliating and embarrassing

situations for the Appellant and his family members.

V) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to consider that the

Appellant approached the Respondent many a times but he

was even denied of having access or to meet his daughter by

the Respondent.

W) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to consider that the

Respondent with mal intention and to harass and humiliate the

Appellant filed false and frivolous cases against the Appellant

and his mother. Respondent filed an application under section

12 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005, on 30th March 2010.

X) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to consider that the family

members and relatives of the Respondent kept on giving

constant life threat to the Appellant with dire consequences till

date. Appellant was stopped and beaten by the goons of the

Respondent family at the entry gate of Dwarka Court on the

30.5.2011 which was the date of hearing and the Appellant

has even made police complaint dated 30.5.2011, 6.6.2011 in

this regard.

Y) Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to consider that it is a

settled legal position that there cannot be condonation if the

offending spouse continues to indulge in the commission of

further acts of cruelty either physical or mental. Either a

temporary stay or even resumption of conjugal rights though

may be strong circumstances to infer condonation on the part

of the offending spouse but the same by itself would not be

sufficient to draw an inference of condonation unless such a

stay and resumption of conjugal relationship is with an intent

to restore back the marital relationship with a sense of

forgiveness and consequently not to indulge in either

repeating the previous acts or to inflict more cruelty as held by

this Hon’ble Court in Dr. Seema Vs. Dr. Alkesh Chaudhary.

Z) Because in Samar Ghosh versus Jaya Ghosh 2007 (5)

SCALE 1, it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court's

that there cannot be any comprehensive definition of the

concept of "mental cruelty", given the wide spectrum of human

behaviour. Cruelty was held to differ from person to person

depending on upbringing, sensitivity, education, family and

cultural background, financial position, social status, customs,

traditions, religious beliefs and value systems. The concept of

mental cruelty was held to be dynamic and changing with the

passage of time and the impact of modern culture. Observing

that a uniform standard could not be laid down, the Supreme

Court enumerated instances of human behaviour that would

be relevant in dealing with cases of "mental cruelty".

The following instances were indicated as illustrative, though

not exhaustive, with regard to adjudging mental cruelty: A

husband undergoing sterilization without medical reasons and

without the consent or knowledge of his wife may lead to

mental cruelty. A wife undergoing sterilization or abortion

without medical reasons or without the consent or knowledge

of the husband may lead to mental cruelty. Unilateral decision

of refusal to have intercourse for a considerable period without

any physical incapacity or valid reason may amount to mental

cruelty. Unilateral decision of either husband or wife after

marriage not to have a child may amount to mental cruelty.

Acute mental pain, agony and suffering to a degree that would

not make it possible for the parties to stay with each other. On

a comprehensive appraisal of the entire matrimonial life, if it

becomes clear that the wronged party cannot reasonably be

asked to put up with such conduct and continue to live with the

other party.

AA) Because in the case of Shobha Rani v. Madhukar

Reddi reported in (1988) 1 SCC 105, the apex Court had an

occasion to examine the concept of cruelty. It was held that

the word ‘cruelty’ has not been defined in the Hindu Marriage

Act. It has been used in Section 13(1)(i)(a) of the Act in the

context of human conduct or behaviour in relation to or in

respect of matrimonial duties or obligations. It is a course of

conduct of one which is adversely affecting the other. The

cruelty may be mental or physical, intentional or unintentional.

If it is physical, it is a question of fact and degree. If it is

mental, the enquiry must begin as to the nature of the cruel

treatment and then as to the impact of such treatment on the

mind of the spouse. Whether it caused reasonable

apprehension that it would be harmful or injurious to live with

the other, ultimately, is a matter of inference to be drawn by

taking into account the nature of the conduct and its effect on

the complaining spouse. There may, however, be cases

where the conduct complained of itself is bad enough and per

se unlawful or illegal. Then the impact or the injurious effect on

the other spouse need not be enquired into or considered. In

such cases, the cruelty will be established if the conduct itself

is proved or admitted. The absence of intention should not

make any difference in the case, if by ordinary sense in

human affairs, the act complained of could otherwise be

regarded as cruelty. Intention is not a necessary element in

cruelty. The relief to the party cannot be denied on the ground

that there has been no deliberate or wilful ill-treatment.

BB) In the case of V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat (Mrs.) reported in

(1994) 1 SCC 337, the apex Court observed, in para 16 at

page 347, as under:

“16. Mental cruelty in Section 13(1)(i-a) can broadly be

defined as that conduct which inflicts upon the other party

such mental pain and suffering as would make it not

possible for that party to live with the other. In other words,

mental cruelty must be of such a nature that the parties

cannot reasonably be expected to live together. The

situation must be such that the wronged party cannot

reasonably be asked to put up with such conduct and

continue to live with the other party. It is not necessary to

prove that the mental cruelty is such as to cause injury to

the health of the Appellant. While arriving at such

conclusion, regard must be had to the social status,

educational level of the parties, the society they move in,

the possibility or otherwise of the parties ever living

together in case they are already living apart and all other

relevant facts and circumstances which it is neither

possible nor desirable to set out exhaustively. What is

cruelty in one case may not amount to cruelty in another

case. It is a matter to be determined in each case having

regard to the facts and circumstances of that case. If it is a

case of accusations and allegations, regard must also be

had to the context in which they were made.”

CC) Because in Gananath Pattnaik v. State of Orissa

reported in (2002) 2 SCC 619 observed as under:

“The concept of cruelty and its effect varies from individual

to individual, also depending upon the social and economic

status to which such person belongs. “Cruelty” for the

purposes of constituting the offence under the aforesaid

section need not be physical. Even mental torture or

abnormal behaviour may amount to cruelty and

harassment in a given case.”

4. That the Appellant has not preferred any other Appeal before this

Hon’ble Court or the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the

impugned order dated 16.12.2011 passed by the Mr. Deepak



divorce on behalf of Appellant in HMA Case No. 678 of 2010

5. That this Hon’ble Court has got the jurisdiction to entertain the

present Appeal as the concerned Ld. Trial Court is court below to

this Hon’ble Court.

6. That the Appellant has no other efficacious and effective measure

against the order dated 16.12.2011 passed by the Mr. Deepak



divorce on behalf of Appellant in HMA Case No. 678 of 2010.

7. That the annexure appended to the present Appeal are true

copies of their respective originals. That the instant Appeal is filed

within limitation period.

PRAYER

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present case it is

therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court in it’s

power of superintendence may kindly be pleased to:-

a. Allow the present Appeal and set aside the impugned

order dated 16.12.2011 passed by the Ld. Principal

Judge Family Courts, Dwarka, Delhi in Petition under

section 13(1)(1A) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for

decree of divorce on behalf of Appellant in HMA Case

No. 678 of 2010,

b. Pass a decree of divorce in favor of Appellant and

against the Respondent as the acts of the Respondents

amounts to cruelty;

c. Pass any other further orders/directions, which this

Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and

circumstances of the case against the Respondent and

in favor of the Appellant.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, YOUR HUMBLE APPELLANT AS IS DUTY BOUND, SHALL EVER PRAY.

APPELLANT

THROUGH COUNSEL

[JAI BANSAL] Chamber No.105, New Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi - 110001 Mobile: 9868566649

Filed on: 03.02..2012

Place: New Delhi



AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash, aged about 39 years S/o Late Sh. D.N. Poddar, R/o:

RZF – 893, Netaji Subhas Marg, Raj Nagar – II, Palam Colony, New

Delhi - 110077, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:

1. That I am the Appellant in the above mentioned Appeal and

am well conversant with the facts of the case and am also

competent to swear the present affidavit.

2. That the contents of the accompanying Appeal Under Section

28 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955 have been drafted by my

counsel as per my instructions and the contents of the same

have been duly read and understood by me and after fully

understanding the contents of the same, I hereby state that

the facts stated therein are all true and correct to my

knowledge. The facts stated therein may kindly be read as

part and parcel of the present affidavit also as the contents of

the same have not been reproduced herein for the sake of

brevity.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION: Verified at Delhi on this 3rd day of February 2012 that the contents

of the above affidavit are true to my knowledge. No part of it is false

and nothing has been concealed there from.

DEPONENT

ANNEXURE A-1

ANNEXURE A-2(Colly)

New Delhi 25/11/2004

Respected Father in Law, Pranam! You are well aware and you have accepted these facts that you have back stabbed me with the help of your wrong nexus with power, black money, goons and your own ill motive. You have snatched and ruined the only crutches of my ailing old age parents and house. Your house would have never seen the pump and show of marriage of your any daughters; no happiness would have come, because no body from the poddar community was ready to marry with your defective, physically disabled eldest daughter. You have punished me for my blind faith on you and your family. You have taken my social service for your own vested interest. I was the single pampered son of my parents whom you have destroyed for ever. You had shown your second daughter who was physically and mentally fit for the marriage but by force at gun point solemnized marriage with defective, physically disabled eldest daughter who was the main hurdle for the marriage and happiness of your rest of your daughters. Alright, now I am compelled and pressurized by you to defend the social prestige of my parents and family. However, Rina cannot do any household work. She is using quilt even in scorching heat, she does not even sweat in the scorching heat, and she says, I am like this since childhood. She further says, I cannot do household work, cannot cook and even cannot render nursing care and support to the in-laws. Keep maid servant for that. I am a premature (seven month) delivered baby. My parents have performed the marriage rituals just to remove my unmarried ship. My father was not in favour of my marriage, he wanted to keep me at home without my marriage for life long. It was only my mother, who was adamant and taken a pledge to perform the rituals of marriage even at the cost of fraud planning. My orthodox mother believes that the unmarried ship of elder daughter is considered to be a great sin in the Hindu religious mythology. She always seems to be irritated and shouting to pinch me for my poverty and for my handicapped ailing father. She collects neighbors by way of shouting at the top of her voice that my family members are lunatic. You kindly make her understand that my three member’s family is very-very small and closely knitted family.

Please make her understand to stop her from tarnishing my social image. Her manifested behavior and attitude seems astonishing. She seems mentally imbalanced. When I try to make her understand then she reverts back me with violent sound that everybody in her family knows this fact. She says, my parents are well aware about the fact that I am defective since birth. They have solemnized this marriage intentionally. No body from Poddar community was ready establishing marriage relationship with my family because of me. Your parents were handicapped and innocent simple guys therefore did this marriage. Now, in laws, I am mentally upset what to do? How to run my house? How to save the life of my parents? And above all how to solve this never-ending unsolved problem? You people have intentionally destroyed my happy small family. Now, I am surviving just as a living dead body. I am dying every moment because of the day to day quarrel and pinching comments by her. I pray from you with folded handed to save my three member family from all time devastating catastrophe. You may please intervene in between to correct the behavior of your daughter Rina. Hope, you will pay attention to my difficulties and keep the derailed train on the track. Yours truly, Om prakash

New Delhi

20/06/2005 Beloved Rina, You deserted me and left my father on his own condition when he was on death bed. You left with your father to Dhanbad in the pretext of delivery as per the direction/instruction of your parents. You did not pay any heed to my crisis situation, I kept on crying but you ignored it. I and my dying father desire to see the face of the baby. He is not expecting to live more days. It is his last desire to see the face of his only grand child. I too am willing to see the baby. Kindly bring her here or else allow me to reach there. Even now you have an opportunity to correct your attitude and to accept the in laws house. This is your real home. I again pray with folded handed to come back at the earliest. Yours truly, Om prakash


Loving Father In law, Pranam with respect! Father in Law, I have tried to contact Rina many a times over telephone in the month of June, 2005 but she did not pick up my call. She even did not reply me back the letter of dated 25th June, 2005. I had prayed her to come back with baby. I am neither in a position to concentrate on the deteriorating health of my ailing parents nor in a position to concentrate on my private job. I am always encountering loneliness. I am always experiencing restlessness. Sometimes, I have to rush to hospital, cook in the kitchen, massage to my mother, father is bedridden stool and urine are passing through catheter on the bed itself. How can I run one man show? What should I do? Should I do job or render nursing care and support to the needy parents? Nothing comes to my restless mind at this point of time. It seems that I have to sacrifice my career and chose to concentrate on my ailing parents. Because, It is my belief that I can get private jobs latter in my life but father once gone will never come back to hold my hand. However, it is the matter of great grief that Rina neither bother to reply me back of my letters nor bother to talk over telephone. We are restless to see the baby. Father in law, you being an eldest member in your family can enlighten her with worldly practical knowledge to bring her on the right track. I am writing this letter with great hope for needing your help and kind intervention in this matter. I am sustaining my life with great pain. I am feeling the vacuum of life partner and baby in my life. Eyes are tirelessly waiting to see them. I have started developing the symptom of forgetting things due to relentless anxiety. I have started experiencing black outs in front of my eyes. Now, I am not in a position to write a single line further because of my severe emotional sensitivity, just send them back at the earliest. Father in Law, you being an eldest in your family can play a role of torch bearer for correcting your daughter Rina. Yours truly, Om Prakash


Loving Rina, Love! I am writing you with great grief that I have lost my father untimely. Neither you nor any member from your family bothered to attend the funeral or participated in the post funereal rituals. Your presence was obvious and needed to perform “grinding of rice” custom in the post funeral rituals which is done by the daughter in law as per the Hindu mythology. However, my mother had to do in your absence. It has become meaningless for me to consider you as my wife and daughter in Law for this house. Being an educated person and responsible husband, today you have compelled me to feel that the name of so called wife has become meaning less for me in my life. You have tarnished our social image and I suspect whether you have performed the post funeral rituals of that baby or not. I am saying it with great griefs that kindly spell me out clearly whether or not you want to remain as my wife. I will be waiting for your reply. Yours truly, Om Prakash

ANNEXURE A-3

BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE; FAMILY COURT; DWARKA

COURTS; NEW DELHI

H.M.A. NO. 700 OF 2010

In The Matter Of: - Om Prakash Poddar, S/o late D.N. Poddar, R/o RZH – 650, RZH – Block, Near: Kennedy Public School, Raj Nagar – II, New Delhi – 110077 …… PETITIONER

VERSUS Smt. Rina Kumari, W/o Sh. Om Prakash Poddar, D/o Surendra Narayan Poddar, RC, Marketing Division, Indian Oil Corporation, Barauni Refinery, P.S. Barauni, Distt.: Begusarai, Bihar …… RESPONDENT

PETITION UNDER SECTION 13 (1)(i-a) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1956 (AS AMENDED UP-TO-DATE)FOR DISSOLUTION OF

MARRIAGE BY A DECREE OF DIVORCE ON THE GROUND OF CRUELTY

May it please be your honor: -

1. That it is true that marriage are settled in heaven, but performed /

organized on the earth and as ordained but providence, the

applicant/petitioner has been united in to wedlock with the

respondent on 24th June 2004. An affidavit to the factum of

marriage is enclosed herewith this petition.

Original photographs of the marriage is Annexed as Annexure P-1(colly).

2. That the status, age and place of residence of the parties before

their marriage and at the time of filing of the present petition are as

follows:-

HUSBAND (PETITIONER)

STATUS AGE

RESIDENCE

BEFORE THE MARRIAGE

UNMARRIED HINDU

30 years, S/o late D.N. Poddar, Sukkar Haat, Sonaili, Kadwa, Distt.: katihar (Bihar)

AT THE TIME OF FILING OF THIS PETITION

MARRIED HINDU 37 Years S/o late D.N. Poddar , R/o RZH – 650, RZH – Block, Near: Kennedy Public School, Raj Nagar – II, New Delhi – 110077

WIFE (RESPONDENT)

STATUS AGE RESIDENCE

BEFORE THE MARRIAGE

UNMARRIED HINDU

31 years D/o Surendra Narayan Poddar, RC, Marketing Division, Indian Oil Corporation, Dhanbad, P.S. Barauni, Distt.: Begusarai, Bihar

AT THE TIME OF FILING THIS PETITION

MARRIED HINDU

38 years D/o Surendra Narayan Poddar, Qrt. No. RH-5/6, Township, Barauni Refinery, P.S. Barauni, Distt.: Begusarai, Bihar

3. That it would not be out of context to mention here that at the

time of marriage of the parents of the respondent had intentionally

and deliberately concealed the age and qualification(s) of the

respondent from the knowledge of the family of the petitioner.

4. That the marriage of the applicant with the respondent was

solemnized as per customs and rites in the Hotel Satkar at Katihar

(Bihar) with Pump and Show amongst a gathering of kith and kin

and the invitees.

5. That after the solemnization of marriage the applicant and his

parents took the respondent to her matrimonial home situated at

Sukkar Haat Sonaili, Kadwa Distt.: Katihar (Bihar) on 25th June

2004.

6. That the respondent resided under the roof of her matrimonial

home at Sonaili till 18th day of July 2004.

7. That the applicant works at Delhi and resides there and even on

the date of his marriage with respondent, he was in private job at

Delhi and the applicant took the respondent to his rented residence

in New Delhi and there the respondent resided with the applicant.

8. That the petitioner and the respondent reached Delhi on 20th July,

2004 and from this day of marriage the instances of cruelty began

at the part of the respondent; The Respondent Smt Rina Kumari

started behaving very strangely from 25th June, 2004 itself, i.e.

immediately one day after the marriage and soon after reaching

Delhi. She started misbehaving with the Petitioner, his father (then

aged 65 years), his mother (then aged 60 years). She started

arguing with them on various extremely trivial matters and on

requests by the Petitioner and his family members to calm down,

she started shouting at the top of her voice, creating an extremely

embarrassing situation in front of the guests present there and also

in front of the neighbours who could hear her shouting. Somehow,

the Petitioner and his family members managed to calm her down

at that time through repeated requests. This act on the part of

respondent was embarrassing and stressing for the petitioner and

his family members just within few days of marriage in the

traditional family set up, where so many relatives and family

members had not left the house.

9. That soon after reaching Delhi Residence on 20th July,2004 and

thereafter, the Petitioner’s wife Smt Rina Kumari started showing

extremely abnormal, awkward, cruel, disrespectful and oppressive

behaviour against him without any just reason. She referred to the

discussion she had with the Petitioner and his parents etc. at Delhi

on 20th July 2004 and said “I listened to you at that time, but no

one has the courage to stop me from shouting, and if you stop me

in future, I will seal your mouth with tape”. The Petitioner got

shocked listening to such words from a newly-wed bride and could

not respond to her in any manner out of utter shock, agony and

despair.

10. That from the very first day of reaching Delhi, the Respondent

started referring the Petitioner and every possession of his with

utter derogation, which were either collected by the Petitioner after

12 years of honest and hard work or given to him by his parents.

She referred to the house, furniture, crockery and other things to

be ‘fit only for servants’ and that in her own house at Dhanbad

even servants ate in better crockery.

11. That the Respondent even endlessly argued on the fact that the

House was not an Officer’s Quarter and referred to the house as

being fit for servants only.

12. That the Respondent always complained to the Petitioner that she

felt embarrassed in sitting with the petitioner and that her parents

in Dhanbad possessed even luxurious vehicles. Such repeated acts

of derogation, degradation and insult by the Respondent led to

Petitioner’s severe mental anguish and disturbance.

13. That the Respondent-wife did not show any interest in doing any

household work such as cooking, looking after the house etc. The

Petitioner, therefore, had to do all the household works, even after

the marriage. Even after Petitioner’s repeated requests, the

Respondent did not budge and did not show any interest in any

household work. Often the Petitioner had to leave his home for

office in a hungry state.

14. That the Respondent was in a habit of waking up very late, and by

that time, the Petitioner would clean the house and get ready for

his work after his routine exercising etc. The Petitioner would urge

the Respondent to get up a little early and take some interest in

the household work which would also keep her a little busy.

However, the Respondent did not listen to his advice and instead

shouted at him as to how dare he had courage to ask him to do so.

After each bit of advice from the Petitioner, the Respondent would

argue, shout, cry and throw all sorts of tantrums to create an

embarrassing situation for the Petitioner.

15. That the Respondent would not only get up late but would also

never take a bath in the morning, go to toilet etc. in time. She

would keep lying in the bed the whole day. She would eat all her

meals only on the bed and would have a bath only in the evening

(after 7-8 PM) when the Petitioner was about to reach back home

after his office work. All this reflected not only indiscipline but also

an unhygienic aspect of the Respondent’s personality. There were

often arguments between the Petitioner and the Respondent on

these hygiene issues and the Petitioner advised the Respondent to

finish her daily chores timely in the morning and have her meals

with him properly and not on bed, but the Respondent would never

listen to the advice of the Petitioner to mend her ways.

16. That often on trivial matters, the Respondent misbehaved, argued

and quarreled with the Petitioner endlessly not allowing him to

sleep after his hard day’s work till late in the night and not

acceding to his request to let him sleep.

17. That, shockingly, the Respondent would often threaten to seal the

Petitioner’s mouth with tape whenever he would try to appease her

and calm her down. She would also threaten to harm him

physically if the Petitioner wouldn’t relent to her control-freak,

dominating and oppressive ways of behaviour, wherein the

Petitioner was denied a free way of existence and all things of his

choice and liking. All his routine, intellectual and academic pursuits

such as listening to music, talking over phone, exercising in the

morning, watching television, pursuing higher education etc. were

repeatedly questioned by the Respondent in order to gain complete

control over him. She would try to ruthlessly dominate him,

denigrate him in front of his friends, colleagues and domestic help

and also force him to severe his ties with his family members.

18. That it was surprising and shocking for the petitioner that on one

day the petitioner received a call from father of the Respondent

wanted the Petitioner to ask his parents for his share in the

property and hand over it to her so that she could live life

luxuriously. When the Petitioner refused to do any such thing, the

respondent uttered extremely abusive and derogatory words

against the Petitioner and his family members. Thus, from the very

beginning of the marriage, the Respondent wife showed extremely

argumentative, cruel and greedy nature of her character.

19. That the Respondent uttered shockingly disrespectful and

derogatory things about the Petitioner and his possessions to his

domestic help also and even to all his friends and colleagues and

their spouses, and thereby tried to harm his personal and official

reputation, resulting in severe mental anguish, harassment and

mental stress.

20. That on so many occasions in the few months she stayed with the

Petitioner, the Respondent threatened the Petitioner though his

friends and colleagues and their spouses that she would ‘teach him

and his family a good lesson’ and would destroy his career and

official and personal reputation if the petitioner doesn’t succumb to

her ill motive and unwanted demands that could give her sadistic

pleasure.

21. That the respondent continued with her cruel, oppressive,

dominating, abusive and control-freak behaviour despite the fact

that Petitioner tried to normalize the situation and calm and please

her by taking her out for movies, dinners, various classical music

shows i.e santooar recital of Rahul Sharma at Purana Quila, New

Delhi, Bhakti Mahotsav at Nehru park, chanakya puri, Delhi, concert

of Pop Singer shaan at NSIC grounds, Kalkaji, Delhi between

Feb,2005 – April 2005 and also plays and dance programs being

held at different places in Delhi. However, she would not let the

Petitioner stay in peace there also, and within a few minutes of the

start of the programs would force the Petitioner to leave the venue

for home. When the Petitioner requested the Respondent to stay

put for some more time, as the performing artists of the classical

programs would get disturbed if the audience started moving out.

She would not listen and started shouting in front of all the

audience and create an extremely embarrassing situation in front of

the Petitioner who would have no choice but to leave the venue as

demanded by the Respondent. Such incidences would leave the

Petitioner shocked, dejected, hurt and deeply anguished.

22. That the Respondent also repeatedly threatened the Petitioner

directly and also indirectly through other people such as his

domestic help, friends and colleagues that she was ‘capable of

going to any extent’ and taking the ‘most extreme step’ to harm

the Petitioner and his family members if they do not succumb to

the unrealistic behaviour and ill will. Because of her repeated acts

of direct and indirect threatening, the Petitioner always lived in a

state of fear, anxiety, apprehension and mental stress.

23. That the Respondent would often threaten the Petitioner directly

and indirectly that her family is very influential in Begusarai and

knows several Police officials, Administrative officers, local political

leaders and Lawyers, and would threaten that she was capable of

getting the Petitioner and his family jailed on any false pretext of

dowry harassment and cruelty, if the Petitioner wouldn’t part with

his share of his parents property and hand it over to her.

24. That the Respondent routinely threatened the Petitioner that she

knew that all the Laws are in favour of wives (women) and that she

would take some extreme step to teach the Petitioner a good

lesson if he doesn’t relent to her threats & demands and

oppressive, dominating & control-freak behaviour.

25. That when the Petitioner did not relent to the Respondent’s threats

and unlawful demands, the Respondent resorted to another

shocking way of making the Petitioner relent to her demands and

oppressive ways of behaviour. Within a few days of marriage, she

started threatening that she would commit suicide whenever the

Petitioner tried to appease her in course of arguments and

discussions with her. The Petitioner initially got extremely scared

listening to this threat and also relented to Respondent’s demands

to some extent.

26. That even after getting repeatedly terrorized by the Respondent by

suicide threats, when the Petitioner did not completely surrender to

her unlawful demands and dominating behaviour, she then started

threatening that she would get the Petitioner killed and take control

over all his assets, such as Household effects, Money, Gratuity,

Pension, Provident Fund etc. The Petitioner got extremely

terrorized and felt very scared living in the same house with a wife

constantly threatening him of suicide and murder. The petitioner

did not find it suitable to bring these things before the police or any

other authority in order to bring everything in its normal conditions

and with a hope that the respondent would realise her fault and

improvement may come in her behaviours and the marriage shall

persist. But all in vain the respondent did not bring in any

improvement rather her cruelty went on increasing the intensity of

cruelty went on increasing with the span of time.

27. That the Petitioner often discussed his unfortunate state of agony

with his parents over phone. His parents got very worried and

would advise that such things could be due to initial adjustment

problems in a new marriage or due to some temperamental

problems and that he should continue to appease the respondent

so that a normal matrimonial life could begin.

28. That, despite all efforts from the side of the Petitioner, the

Respondent continued to threaten him to destroy his life, career,

personal and official reputation and that of his family members,

directly or indirectly. As a result, the Petitioner started suffering

from high blood pressure, severe mental & physical stress, weight

loss and insomnia. He could not sleep properly for weeks, as he

was very scared of his wife that she would get her killed and he felt

very insecure staying with the Respondent in his own house.

29. That the Petitioner tried repeatedly and requested the Respondent

to mend her ways. But, the Respondent did not listen to him and

continued with the practice of spreading derogatory and degrading

things about him, his position and his possessions and also her

habit of threatening and blackmailing him till late in the night,

every day.

30. That due to her argumentative, crooked, conspiring, rigid,

belligerent, cruel, insensitive and inhuman behaviour and also on

account of her domineering and control-freak attitude, the

Petitioner could never relate to her mentally, physically and

intellectually and till the time the Respondent stayed with him, i.e.

15th April 2005, the Petitioner and Respondent were not able to

have a normal relationship of husband and wife, for which she is

solely responsible.

31. That however, as a result of cohabitation, the respondent

conceived and when her pregnancy came to advanced stage, the

respondent communicated this to her father, who came to Delhi

with the return ticket for himself and the respondent in Poorva

Express New Delhi to Kolkata bound train dated 15th April, 2005

and offered a proposal to the applicant to allow his daughter to go

to his place of service/ residence on the ground that the

respondent required the Nursing and presence of her mother at the

time of delivery of child.

It is pertinent to mention here that the applicant’s handicapped,

diabetic father was undergoing treatment with AIIMS and needing

care and support of family members. As applicant did not have any

male or female member to support his infirm father and was

reeling under wretched condition because of unemployment

therefore respondent’s father preferred to leave the petitioner and

his bedridden infirm father on their own condition and went back to

his official quarter then in Dhanbad.

32. Applicant did not accept the proposal but the respondent and her

father did not pay any heed to his request and his condition

accusing him of wretched condition and preferred to go back to his

company allotted quarter of Dhanbad.

33. That the father of the respondent took the respondent to his

Government residence at Dhanbad (Bihar), now in Jharkhand.

34. That the respondent gave birth to a female child at Dhanbad and

now she is residing with her father at Q.NO. RH-5/6, Township,

Refinery, Baruni, Distt.: Begusarai, where the father of the

respondent is employed as Assistant Manager (RC), Marketing

Division with Indian Oil Corporation.

35. That the applicant is residing at Delhi and makes occasional visits

at his parental house at Sonaili. That a girl child was born out of

this wed lock between the petitioner and the respondent herein on

20th May 2005 in Dhanbad.

36. That the father of the respondent has earlier been residing at

Dhanbad, but after vacating his official quarter at Dhanbad, is

residing in his official quarter within the premises of Indian Oil

Corporation at Barauni. P.S.: Barauni, Distt.: Bagusarai (Bihar) and

his family is residing in personal owned Flat in Patna and is making

occasional visit to IOC Barauni’s official quarter, the address of

Patna is not known to the petitioner, as the petitioner has not

visited the residence of the respondent since the date of marriage.

37. That the mother of the applicant has also grown old and is

suffering from severe chronic asthma and is not able to cope with

all the domestic drudgeries.

38. That the applicant/petitioner also resides at Delhi alone with no

soul to look after him and to attend to his needs.

39. That the applicant placed in the predicament narrated above, made

request to respondent to come to Delhi in his company, but the

respondent did not pay any heed to the request of the applicant

made on telephone as well as through various letters, despite the

request has been made on the number of occasion.

40. That the applicant arranged a contact with the father of the

respondent on telephone and requested him to bring the

respondent to his residence at Delhi but he gave evasive reply and

on repetition of such request by the applicant / petitioner, the

father of the respondent grew irritant and refused to send his

daughter either to Sonaili or to Delhi.

41. That the respondent also in the words of his father refused to come

to Sonaili or to Delhi.

42. That the applicant / petitioner himself visited the official residence

of the father of the respondent at Barauni, Distt.: Begusarai with

the sole motive to bring his wife/respondent back to Delhi or to

Sonaili, but the respondent and her father displayed annoyance at

such request and denied to comply with the same, the father of the

respondent also threatened the applicant / respondent with dire

consequences and asked him to quit the places.

43. That while stay in Delhi every day the respondent used to pick up

quarrel and did not prepare food and used to inflict physical and mental cruelty on the petitioner and his parents. The respondent used to behave in an inhuman manner with the petitioner resulting in mental agony / cruelty upon the petitioner and always threatened to commit suicide to put them behind the bar.

44. That the respondent used to abuse the petitioner and his parents

without any rhyme or reason. It is pertinent to mention here that in

fact the respondent was abnormal child by birth in comparison to

her other sisters and brother and was mentally retarded, which fact

was never disclosed by the parents of the respondent at the time of

marriage. The petitioner and his parents came to know this fact

only when the petitioner and respondent stayed at Delhi

45. The respondent quite often used to quarrel with the petitioner on

flimsy issues such as issues Like poverty, wretched condition, ailing parents / family and used to abuse the petitioner and her parents daily without any rhyme or reason.

46. That the respondent and his parents quite often pressurized the

petitioner and also inflicted mental cruelty upon the petitioner, which had made the petitioner impossible to live with them.

47. That during the short span of about 8-9 months during which the

petitioner stayed with the respondent at Delhi, she never stayed as a homely wife and never behaved properly/normally.

48. That not only this, the respondent never allowed the petitioner to

visit his parents even for a single day.

49. That due to the mental and constant cruelty being inflicted by the respondent, the petitioner was not in a position to go to his daily work and had to lose his employment and became unemployed. It is pertinent to mention here that till date the petitioner is unemployed and could not get any suitable employment despite best efforts.

50. It is pertinent to mention here that when the father of the

petitioner was seriously ill and was on death bed undergoing

treatment with AIIMS and taking two meals from Tiffin vendor

ultimately died prematurely due to lack of care and support and

persistent threatening from the respondent’s family on 15th Nov,

2007. The respondent’s family even did not pay any attention to

the desire/request of the dying father of the petitioner to see the

face of his only grandchild as the petitioner was in Delhi, the

respondent who was in her parental house, never cared to take

care of the father of the petitioner, not to talk of visiting his ailing

father. Not only this even the parents of the respondent also did

not visit or take care of the ailing father of the petitioner. They

even did not participate in the last rituals of the petitioner’s

departed father.

51. That the respondent was always treating the petitioner more

harshly because of his poverty, wretched condition, diseased family

/ ailing parents and unemployment. The mental and physical

torture on the petitioner by the respondent and his parents

increased many fold.

52. That the petitioner had made his best effort to have a peaceful

matrimonial life but the respondent did not change her behaviour. 53. That in fact, even during the short period of time when the petitioner

and respondent lived in their matrimonial home at Delhi, the acts of the respondent was unbecoming of a wife. She never bothered to take care of her Husband / the petitioner. She was using quilt even in extreme hot season when a normal people like us use to have cooler / AC. She was sleeping without fan in hot summer days. In winter day her hand used to turn black whenever she touched water.

54. That in fact, it was almost impossible for the petitioner to live with

the respondent due to her act, conduct and treatment with the petitioner.

55. That since 15th April 2005, the respondent has deserted her

matrimonial house and has never contacted the petitioner or tried to come back at her matrimonial House.

56. That the Respondent visited her parent’s place at Begusarai &

Patna several times between 2004 and 2005, the day when she

finally left her matrimonial home in Delhi. The Petitioner always

booked tickets for the Respondent to New Delhi for those

journey(s) so that she could travel comfortably.

57. That to the utter despair, hopelessness and disappointment, the

mother of the Petitioner left for her native place at Sonaili, Katihar

in the last week of Oct, 2005 The Petitioner accompanied her till

Sonaili,katihar and came back. The Respondent did not come with

the Petitioner or to his native place despite several requests made

by the Petitioner and his mother. Finally, the Petitioner and his

mother alone left for Delhi and the Respondent stayed with her

parents at Begusarai / Patna during that time. The mother of the

Petitioner left for her hometown in utter mental anguish and

serious physical condition with her lung disorder getting aggravated

along with severe breathlessness and hypertension, in order to

obtain treatment from her family doctors.

58. That under the prevailing circumstances, the Petitioner was

seriously frightened about his physical safety, health and life

because of the constant threatening and blackmailing tactics of

Respondent, while living alone with her, he started suffering from a

nagging fear that the Respondent might even inflict some harm on

herself or pretend do so in a malicious attempt to destroy the life,

career, personal and official reputation of the Petitioner, because

the Respondent continued to terrorize the Petitioner with her

repeated threats to commit suicide.

59. That in the month of May 2005 the Petitioner tried to appease and

calm her saying that the matter needs to be resolved amicably and

not through threats of dire consequences. Therefore, the Petitioner

advised the Respondent and her family members (parents,

brothers, sisters etc.) that she may be asked to continue to remain

at her matrimonial house.

60. That the Petitioner being a God fearing person and only bread

earner in the family, seriously cared for his career, personal, life

and health and that of his family members. However, the cruel and

quarrelsome behaviour of his Respondent wife made him very

nervous, physically & mentally stressed and frightened due to

repeated threats of suicides and murder and blackmailing and in

the process made his life totally miserable.

61. That due to the circumstances stated above, the Petitioner started

living under serious fear of life, injury and also damage to his

career, personal & official reputation and also of his family

members, on account of constant blackmailing and threatening by

the Respondent, moreover by the parents of the respondent.

62. That in order to avoid such highly undesirable consequences of a

matrimonial relationship that appeared to be beyond redemption

then and in the grave apprehension that the Respondent would try

to implicate the Petitioner in some false criminal cases and try to

harm his personal and official reputation.

63. That right from the first day of marriage, the Respondent has been

misbehaving and treating the Petitioner and his family with intense

cruelty. The Respondent has been quarrelling, harassing and

intimidating the Petitioner and his family for the few months she

stayed with the Petitioner and had always behaved in a crooked

and conspiratory fashion constantly threatening and harassing the

Petitioner and his family. The Respondent never behaved like a

wife but always like an adversary from the very beginning of the

marriage who appeared to have come with a predecided mind to

destroy the matrimonial home, peace and the sanctity of this

relationship.

64. That the Respondent had tried her best to denigrate, degrade and

terrorize the Petitioner to surrender to her unlawful and unethical

demands. She has been in a habit of giving threats to commit

suicide whenever advised to mend her ways. Through her intensely

cruel, insensitive and inhuman nature and through her belligerent

and sadistic attitude and bent of mind, she has caused irreparable,

insurmountable and unfathomable mental trauma, pain, stress,

anguish and deep harassment to the Petitioner and his family

members.

65. That the Respondent has tried her best to cause damage to the

otherwise impeccable reputation of the Petitioner and his family

though her threatening ways of life, including her repeated threats

for committing suicide whenever advised to mend her ways,

blackmailing tactics and has eventually caused intense cruelty.

66. That under the above intensely unbearable circumstances which

are beyond repair and redemption now, the Petitioner fears that

any further continuance of his relation with the Respondent may be

extremely hazardous to his life, property and money, personal and

official reputation and career and also to the life, health, property

and money of his family members.

67. That the parties to petition are not residing together from April

2005 (more than five years) and since then the parties have no

access to each other as they are residing separately and have not

established consummation.

68. That the acts of the respondent have caused mental trauma to the

applicant and as a result of that he could neither concentrate on his

private job nor on his diseased ailing parents. Consequently he lost

his father prematurely and unexpectedly and lost his 30 jobs

approximately. His two member family is so traumatized that he is

apprehended to lose his asthmatic mother untimely. There is a

reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it will be

harmful and injurious for him to live with the respondent.

69. That the petitioner has already lost his father prematurely and

there is a fear to lose his ailing mother prematurely due to this

endless episode. Being a social worker by profession, there is a

reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that he may

turn into psychic personality after the death of his mother (who

happens to be the last member in his family) if he is not being

relieved from the relentless cruelties.

70. That in fact, there has been irretrievable breakdown of marriage between the petitioner and respondent and there is no possibility of the petitioner and the respondent living together.

71. That the respondent continuously treated the petitioner with great

mental cruelty and harassment like persistent threatening of petrol pumps goons who have nexus with her father, putting him and his mother behind the bar due to which the petitioner although married, has to live a life of unmarried and is forced to live separately and compelled to lead a life in austerity because of mental trauma and inconsistencies in job.

72. That the behaviour and attitude of the respondent has caused

tremendous mental pain and agony resulting in mental trauma and

mental imbalances to the petitioner, who happens to be single son

of his ailing mother, who has decided that he could not continue to

suffer in this manner endlessly and hence this petition.

73. That the petitioner has not in any manner condoned the acts of

cruelties of the respondent, further the petitioner states that he has

not connived in any manner in bringing the actual facts of cruelty

of the respondent against the petitioner .

74. That the petition is not presented in collusion with the respondent.

75. That there has been unnecessary and improper delay in filing of

the present petition because of persistent threatening by the

respondents family citing the nexus between petrol pumps goons to

kidnap and kill the petitioner in the court premises itself if divorced

petition being filed by the applicants. There is a serious security

threat of life to the petitioner.

76. That there is no other legal ground why the relief prayed should not

be granted to the petitioner.

77. That thus the respondent has deserted on 15th April 2005 on the

pretext of going to her mother to deliver a child And getting rid of

/Abandoning the poverty ridden, unemployed husband and

diseased parents of petitioner and the respondent and her parents

and family members are in collusion with each other and

respondent has been refusing to come to the applicant(s) /

petitioner(s) house without any lawful excuse.

78. That there is total separation of the respondent from the house of

the petitioner without his consent, continuously for a period or

more than 5 years, without there being any reasonable cause or

excuse, which amounts to “animus deserendi”.

79. That the petitioner and the respondent lastly resided together at

Delhi within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court, hence

this Hon’ble Court is competent and has jurisdiction to try and

entertain the present petitioner.

80. That the cause of action for this petitioner arose on 15th April 2005

and on subsequent dates, when the applicant made requests to the

respondent to come either to Delhi and to join the matrimonial

home and to resume marital obligation(s) and lastly on 12th March

2010, when the respondent refused to come to the house of

applicant/petitioner at the request of the petitioner over telephone.

The cause of action arose on all the dates when the acts of cruelty,

aforesaid, were committed by the respondent.

81. That the applicant / petitioner is neither in collusion with the

respondent nor the conduct of the respondent has ever been

connived at or condoned.

82. That the petitioner has not instituted any other petition(s) any

where for the same or similar relief. There has not been any

previous civil proceeding with regard to marriage of the parties by

or on behalf of any of the parties to the petition

83. That a fixed amount of requisite court fee of Rs........ has been paid

by the petitioner.

84. That the applicant / petitioner on payment of requisite court fee

prays for the following relief(s): -

-: PRAYER: -

A) The petitioner therefore , under the light of above said facts

and circumstances of the case, prays that the Marriage

between the petitioner and the respondent may be dissolved

by a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty u/s 13(1)(i-

a) of Hindu marriage Act,1955(no.25 of 1955).

B) Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems

fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the

petitioners, as the same is very necessary in the interest and

furtherance of justice.

It is prayed accordingly.

PETITIONER

Verification: -

VERIFIED at NEW DELHI on this 21 day of October, 2010

that the contents of the petition as contained in para no. 01 to 82

are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and

those of para no. 01 to 82 are believed to be true and correct on

information received and the last Para is humble prayer before this

Hon’ble Court and nothing material has been concealed there from.

PETITIONER / APPLICANT

BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE; FAMILY COURT; DWARKA COURTS; NEW DELHI

H.M.A. NO.700/ OF 2010

Om Prakash Poddar ...............PETITIONER

VERSUS

Smt. Rina Kumari ....................RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT OF OM PRAKASH PODDAR, S/O LATE D.N. PODDAR, R/O RZH – 650, RZH – BLOCK, NEAR: KENNEDY PUBLIC SCHOOL, RAJ NAGAR – II, NEW DELHI – 110077, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS

I, the deponent above named, do hereby solemnly affirm and

declare as under:-

1. I am the Petitioner in the above case.

2. I was married to the Respondent on 24th June 2004.

3. I have not presented the petition in collusion with the

Respondent

4. That I have not in any manner condoned the cruelty of the

respondent, further I state that I have not connived in any

manner in bringing the actual facts of cruelty of the

respondent against me.

5. That I am staying separate from Respondent since 15th April

2005.

6. The contents of the accompanying petition under U/S 13(1)(i-

a) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,1955( NO.25 OF 1955) have

been drafted under my instructions and the same are true

and correct to my knowledge and belief and are not being

repeated for the sake of brevity and may be read as part and

parcel of this affidavit. Nothing material has been concealed

there from.

DEPONENT VERIFICATION: -

VERIFIED at NEW DELHI on this ___ day of October, 2010, that the

contents of the above affidavit are true and correct, nothing stated therein is wrong and nothing material has been concealed

from this Hon’ble Court.

DEPONENT

ANNEXURE A-

4(Colly)

ANNEXURE A-5

ANNEXURE A-6

ANNEXURE A-7(Colly)


(ORIGINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

C.M. NO. 2423 OF 2012

IN

MATT APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2012 IN THE MATTER OF: Om Prakash Poddar …APPELLANT VS. Rina Kumari …RESPONDENT APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

CODE FOR SEEKING EXEMPTION FROM FILING TYPED &

CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ANNEXURE/ORDER FILED ALONG

WITH THE INSTANT APPEAL

1. That the present Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant

for setting aside the impugned judgement and decree dated

16.12.2011 passed by the Ld. Principal Judge Family Courts,

Dwarka, Delhi in Petition under section 13(1)(1A) of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 for decree of divorce on behalf of

Appellant in HMA Case No. 678 of 2010.

2. That the balance of convenience lies in favor of the Appellant

and against the Respondent.

3. That in the instant Appeal, Appellant is seeking exemption

from filing typed and certified copy of annexure because of the

paucity of the time.

4. That the present application is made in the interest of justice

and is most bonafide one.

5. That in view of the aforesaid it is humbly requested that the

Appellant be exempted from filing certified copy of annexure

for filing the instant Appeal.

PRAYER

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case it

is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may

kindly be pleased to:-

Exemption from filing the typed and certified copy of

annexure/order be granted to the Appellant.

AND/OR

Pass any other further directions/orders in favor of the

Appellant and against the Respondent in the facts and

circumstances of the present case.

APPELLANT

THROUGH

Jai Bansal

ADVOCATE

NEW-DELHI

DATED:03.02.2012


C.M. NO. 2423 OF 2012

IN


AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash, aged about 39 years S/o Late Sh. D.N. Poddar, R/o:

RZF – 893, Netaji Subhas Marg, Raj Nagar – II, Palam Colony, New

Delhi - 110077, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:

3. That I am the Appellant in the above mentioned Appeal and

am well conversant with the facts of the case and am also

competent to swear the present affidavit.

4. That the contents of the accompanying Application Under

Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code 1908 have been drafted

by my counsel as per my instructions and the contents of the

same have been duly read and understood by me and after

fully understanding the contents of the same, I hereby state

that the facts stated therein are all true and correct to my

knowledge. The facts stated therein may kindly be read as

part and parcel of the present affidavit also as the contents of

the same have not been reproduced herein for the sake of

brevity.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION: Verified at Delhi on this ___ day of February 2012 that the contents

of the above affidavit are true to my knowledge. No part of it is false

and nothing has been concealed there from.

DEPONENT

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

MATT APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2012

COURT NO.02

NDOH: 22.01.2013

IN THE MATTER OF:

Om Prakash Poddar APPELLANT

VS.

Rina Kumari RESPONDENT

INDEX

SN PARTICULARS PAGE

NO.

1 Notice of Motion with proof of

service

1-2

2 Urgent Application 3

3 Application for seeking permission to

appear and argue the appeal appellant

in-person along with Affidavit

4-

6,6A

4 Application for seeking permission to

place additional documents on record

under order 7 of Rule 14 CPC 1908

along with Affidavit

7-10,

10A

5 ANNEXURE AA-1

True copy of email application letter

dated 04.01.2012 addressed to DHCLSC

for obtaining an application Form for

legal Aid.

11-

12

6 ANNEXURE AA-2

True copy of email communication

wherein Legal Aid Advocate admitted

13-21

concealing the fact dated 30.01.2012,

31.01.2012, 01.02.2012 and

02.02.2012.

7 ANNEXURE AA-3

True copy of complaint dated

07.02.2012 to the secretary and

dated 26.04.2012 to the Chairman,

DHCLSC; RTI reply from the PIO, DSLSA

dated 28.08.2012, RTI reply from the

First Appellate Authority, DSLSA

dated 24.09.2012 and RTI application

letter dated 07.10.2012 to the CIC,

New Delhi

22-40

8 ANNEXURE AA-4

True copy of order dated 30.05.2011;

RTI reply from the office of

Principal Judge, Family Court, Dwarka

dated 30.08.2011, RTI appeal dated

08.09.2011 and 12.09.2011 to the

First Appellate Authority, Family

courts, New Delhi; refusal order

dated 07.09.2011; RTI application

letter dated 17.09.2011 against

refusal order.

41-59

9 ANNEXURE AA-5

True copy of RTI reply from the PIO,

High Court of Delhi, New Delhi dated

27.08.2012.

60-61

10. Application for exemption from filing

certified copy of order along with

Affidavit

62-64

DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON :05.12.2012.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI

MATT APPEAL NO.7 OF 2012

In the matter of:

Om Prakash Poddar …APPELLANT

VS.

Rina Kumari …RESPONDENT

NOTICE OF MOTION

TAKE NOTICE that the accompanying

petition/application will be listed before

Court No. 02 on 22.01. 2013 at 10.30

O'Clock in the forenoon, or so soon

thereafter as may be convenient to the

Court.

DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

RZF-893, NETAJI SUBHAS MARG

RAJ NAGAR PART-2, PALAM

COLONY, NEW DELHI110077

New Delhi

Dated:05.12.2012

To

1. Rina Kumari

D/o Surendra Narayan Poddar,

RC, Marketing Division,

Indian Oil Corporation,

Barauni Refinery,

P.S. Barauni,

Distt: Begusarai, Bihar 851114

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI

MATT APPEAL NO.7 OF 2012

In the matter of:


VS.


NOTICE OF MOTION

Vide Notice of Motion dated 03.12.2012

in the aforesaid matter, you were

intimated that the aforesaid matter would

be listed in court no.2 on 22.01.2013.

NOW TAKE NOTICE that the matter will

be listed in court no.2 on 22.01.2013 at

10.30 O'Clock in the forenoon, or so soon

thereafter as may be convenient to the

Court.

DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

RZF-893, NETAJI SUBHAS MARG

RAJ NAGAR PART-2, PALAM

COLONY, NEW DELHI110077

New Delhi

Dated: 04.12.2012

To

1. Rina Kumari

D/o Surendra Narayan Poddar,

RC, Marketing Division,

Indian Oil Corporation,

Barauni Refinery,

P.S. Barauni,

Distt: Begusarai, Bihar 851114

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT

NEW DELHI


Court No.02

NDOH: 22.01.2013

IN THE MATTER OF:


VS.


URGENT APPLICATION

TO

DEPUTY REGISTRAR

HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

NEW DELHI

SIR,

Kindly treat the accompanying Applications as

urgent one in accordance with Delhi High Court

Rules.

The ground of urgency as prayed in the prayer

clause as mentioned in the Applications and the

prayer clause.

DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON :05.12.2012.


C.M. NO. 20463 of 2012


Court No.02

NDOH: 22.01.2013

IN THE MATTER OF :

OM PRAKASH PODDAR … APPELLANT

VERSUS

RINA KUMARI …RESPONDENT

APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO

APPEAR AND ARGUE THE MATT. APPEAL NO 7

OF 2012 UNDER SECTION 28 OF HINDU

MARRIGE ACT 1955, APPELLANT IN-PERSON

To

The Hon’ble Chief Justice and His

Companion Justices of the Hon’ble High

Court of Delhi at New Delhi.

THE HUMBLE APPLICATION OF THE

APPELLANT ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Appellant above named

respectfully submits this application seeking

appeal against the impugned common order dated

16.12.2011 passed by the Family Court, Dwarka

of Delhi in HMA Case NO.678 of 2010.

2. That as per the order dated 06.11.2012 of

High Court of Delhi the Appellant has come to

know that DHCLSC has withdrawn the Legal Aid

without any prior Notice/written intimation to

the Appellant. It appears that DHCLSC has taken

this step in view of the complaints against the

abuse of court process by way of concealing the

material facts by fraud by the legal Aid

Advocate and letting the Legal Aid Advocate to

institute a wrong petition on 08.02.2012 by the

Secretary, DHCLSC before Delhi High Court even

after a complaint to the Secretary on

07.02.2012.

3. That the order/court Notice dated

06.11.2012 of High Court of Delhi has directed

the Appellant to make an alternative

arrangements.

4. That the Appellant is well conversant with

the facts of the case.

5. That the Appellant is financially weak

to afford the lawyer.

PRAYER

It is most respectfully prayed that this

Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

(a) Kindly permit the Appellant to appear and

argue the appeal Appellant in-person.

b) Pass such other order/orders as this

Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in

the facts and circumstances of the case.

DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON :05.12.2012.



Court No.02

NDOH: 22.01.2013

IN THE MATTER OF :


VERSUS


APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO

PLACE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS ON RECORD

UNDER ORDER 7 OF RULE 14 CODE OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE 1908.

To







1. That the appellant above named

respectfully submits this application seeking

appeal against the impugned common order dated

16.12.2011 passed by the Family Court, Dwarka

of Delhi in HMA Case NO.678 of 2010.

2. That the Appellant had come to the DHCLSC on

04.01.2012 with a grievance of abuse of Trial

Court process. (ANNEXURE AA-1)(Pages from 11 to

12).

3. That there is an abuse of court process by

way of concealing the material facts by fraud

without the consent of the Appellant by the

DHCLSC, Legal Aid Advocate. Legal Aid Advocate

has admitted this fact in his email

communication (ANNEXURE AA-2)(Pages from 13 to

21).

4. That the Secretary, DHCLSC has allowed the

Legal Aid Advocate to institute a wrong

petition on 08.02.2012 before Delhi High Court

even after a complaint against legal Aid

Advocate to the Secretary on 07.02.2012.

Another, complaint against Secretary to the

Chairman has been filed on 26.04.2012 and being

delivered on 03.05.2012 and subsequently RTI

has also been filed dated 28.08.2012 to PIO,

DSLSA, dated 24.09.2012 to First Appellate

Authority, DSLSA and dated 07.10.2012 to the

Chief Information Commissioner, New Delhi.

(ANNEXURE AA-3)(Pages from 22 to 40)

5. That there is an abuse of Trial Court

process by way of stopping the whole court

proceedings on 30.05.2011 by the Principal

Judge Family Court, Dwarka Court and in turn

generating a false order sheet alleging the

petitioner for requesting for adjournment of

the court proceedings. Principal Judge did not

sit and chair any of the cases on that date.

RTI dated 30.08.2011; dated 08.09.2011 and

dated 12.09.2011 have been filed against the

unconstitutional and undemocratic act of

Principal Judge, Family Court, Dwarka Court,

New Delhi. Further, Principal Judge, Family

Court refused to tender the ex parte evidence

on 07.09.2011. RTI dated 17.09.2011 also has

been filed against the refusal order to tender

the ex parte evidence and transfer the matter

to another Family Court without any written

request made by the petitioner. As a result of

that Judgment is being passed u/s 10 of HMA

1955 while the petition is filed u/s 13(1)(ia)

of HMA 1955 without the consent of petitioner

in a situation when respondent is ex parte

without filing Written Statement. (ANNEXURE AA-

4) (Pages form 41 to 59)

6. That the Delhi High Court has kept the

file open for one year without any material

proceedings. RTI has been filed against this

act. (ANNEXURE AA-5) (Pages from 60 to 61)

PRAYER



(a) Kindly permit the appellant to place

additional documents on record before

Hon’ble High Court of Delhi to include all

the issues including the events subsequent

to the filing of the petition by the Legal

Aid.




DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 05.12.2012.

ANNEXURE AA-1

Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]>

Application for obtaining an application Form for Legal Aid

2 messages

Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]> Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 7:19

AM To: [email protected]

To,

The Secretary

Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee

New Delhi Sub: Application for obtaining an application Form for Legal Aid

Sir/Madam, I am the resident of Delhi and availed the services of DLSA at District Court of Delhi. I am seeking to file an appeal against the order of a District Court of Delhi. I suppose to file an appeal to the Higher Court within 30 days of the Judgment. The date of judgment was 16th December, 2011. I therefore request you to email me a prescribed application Form to avail legal Aid, if at all; it falls within the preview of your set procedures or else enlighten me with the guidelines. Kindly fix-up an appointment and also guide me to bring the requisite documents needed for an appeal. Recapitulation of sequence of events are as under:

1. I am the petitioner, filed the divorce petition seeking dissolution of marriage with the respondent U/s 13 (1) (i a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on 25.10.2010 in Ms Deepa Sharma, Principal Judge, Family Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi.

2. Respondent appeared once on 09.02.2011 and thereafter chose

not to appear in the matter.

3. 30.05.2011 was fixed for WS filing by the respondent. Respondent chose not to file any WS and in turn, on 30th May I was stopped and beaten to enter the court and threatened to withdraw the case.

4. On the same date (30th May, 2011) Principal Judge, Ms Deepa

Sharma, Family Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi stopped the whole court proceedings and did not and chair any of the cases, in turn order sheet being generated alleging the petitioner for requesting adjournment of the court proceeding.

5. I have filed three RTIs and one appeal against the

unconstitutional and undemocratic act of Principal Judge, Ms Deepa Sharma.

6. As a result of that the respondent is being Ex-parte on

06.06.2011 by the Principal Judge. 7. 07.09.2011 was fixed for coming up for ex parte evidence. Ms

Deepa Sharma refused to tender ex parte evidence and chose to transfer the case to Mr. Deepak Jagotra’s Family Court in Dwarka.

8. Ex-parte evidence was led by me on 09.09.2011 and closed my

evidence on 17.11.2011

9. The date of Judgment was fixed on 16.12.2011 and passed the

order of Judicial Separation under the provision of section 10 of Hindu Marriage Act.

10. I had three member family i.e handicapped father, mother and

myself. I have lost my father prematurely due to respondent’s cruelty and going to lose my mother as she is on home oxygen. Respondent has spoiled my career, ruined my life and turned my house as symmetry ground. As a result of that I am still unemployed at the age of 39.

11. I have produced 4 witnesses i.e. mother, sister friend and

myself but the majesty and Excellencies biased Judges could not find and asses the ground of cruelty. Witnesses are being negated on the ground of “identical statement”. My witnesses are being falsified and blamed no legs to stand and thus baseless and I have made up ground for the sake of making out a case against the respondent.

12. More than six years of separation and “Willful desertion” by

the respondent have been established by the observation of Judges in their Judgment sheet.

13. It is a forced fraudulently solemnized marriage at gun point on

24.06.2004 and being kept under force till date. Force never ceased to operate and by the present Judgment it will never cease to operate. Intentionally, the case has been kept open ended to compel me to adopt destructive path.

14. It was a well planned conspiracy of respondent to ruin my life,

career and family. 15. I do not want to adopt destructive path and have full faith in the

institutions of India. 16. Therefore, I pray for your help and kind support to file an appeal

in the higher institution of Indian Judicial System so that I could begin my constructive life.

With Best Regards, -- Om Prakash Poddar

ANNEXURE AA-2

Om Prakash Poddar

<[email protected]>

Matt Appeal

3 messages

Jai Bansal

<[email protected]>

Mon, Jan 30,

2012 at 2:52

PM

To: [email protected]

Dear Mr. Om,

Enclosed please find the soft copy of the

Appeal for your kind perusal and further

reference. Please come to my office tomorrow

at 4pm in supreme court so we can finalize

the petition so it can be filed in a day or

two.

regards,

--

Jai Bansal, Advocate

Chamber No. 105,

New Lawyers Chamber,

Supreme Court of India,

New Delhi - 110001

Ph:- 09868566649

Residence Ph: 011 45644812

Email: [email protected]

Jai Bansal

<[email protected]>

Mon, Jan 30, 2012

at 8:54 PM

To: [email protected]

[Quoted text hidden]

Matt Appeal.doc

113K

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?&v=b&cs=wh&[email protected]

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=1352f37f316d0588&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy1nghq30&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=1352f37f316d0588&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy1nghq30&safe=1&zw

Om Prakash Poddar

<[email protected]>

Tue, Jan 31, 2012

at 1:10 AM

To: Jai Bansal <[email protected]>

Dear Sir,

Thank you very much indeed for sending me the

draft. Please find attached the Matt Appeal file

with my comments in red flag. I would request you

to kindly incorporate my points as well.

I am coming to meet you at the scheduled time and

venue.

With Best Regards,

--

Om Prakash Poddar

Matt_Appeal_comment.doc

108K

Om Prakash Poddar

<[email protected]

>

Some points for justification of cruelty


Tue,

Jan 31,

2012 at

4:11 AM


Dear Sir,

I just want to add some crucial points in your

justification of cruelty para. You may please

incorporate these points as focal point of

cruelty which impacted my whole family.

I have repeatedly put stress on two things

prominently: crux of the whole episode is:

1. Fraudulent marriage and thereafter

2. Criminal conspiracy

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=1353021b042ff7bf&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy2j14jq0&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=1353021b042ff7bf&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy2j14jq0&safe=1&zw

Sequence of cruelty should be flashed in the

following manner:

1. It was a well planned conspiracy of

respondent family to ruin our three member

family. They came with vested interest.

2. I had three member families. Handicapped

and prolong diabetic father who had above the

knee amputation and had been prescribed for

permanent assistance/escort by AIIMS. Mother

who is COPD and surviving on only 43% of

oxygen and rest 47% is Co2 in her blood as

per ABG report. At the same time she is

thyroid patient. She is completely bedridden.

I have to render all domestic help 24x7.

3. Under the above circumstances, respondent

family intentionally put their physically

disabled daughter with fraud planning, just

to fulfill the custom/rituals of marriage to

get rid of salvation as per the myths of

their family and to ruin my small nuclear

family. It is itself a form of cruelty.

So the cruelty was well planned even before the

fraud marriage.

After the marriage, cruelty was planned to kill

my parents by way of dissociating nursing care

and support, persistent mafia threat and not to

allow me to begin my own life.

Secondly, the cruelty is being aggravated by

way of establishing nexus with Principal Judge

and exercising muscle flexing against me.

Thus, the cruelty has impacted my whole family

and not only me, which I have presented through

affidavit in ex-parte evidence. That evidence

was ignored by the Ld. Judges.

“They are planning to kill my last member i.e.

mother in the similar fashion as they had

killed my father”.

--

Om Prakash Poddar



Jai Bansal

<[email protected]>

Tue, Jan 31, 2012

at 8:42 AM

To: Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]>

Dear Mr. Poddar,

Please incorporate everything in the petition

and bring the same with you at the meeting at 4

pm today in my supreme court office.

regards,


--

Om Prakash Poddar

<[email protected]>

Re: Matt Appeal with comments incorporated

Om Prakash Poddar

<[email protected]>

Wed, Feb 1,

2012 at 1:23 AM


Dear Sir,

As per your instruction, I have typed and

incorporated my comments. However,

highlighted with the yellow color is beyond

my knowledge/reach.

Please find attached the incorporated and

typed (fresh) Matt Appeal documents for

filing an appeal on 1st of Feb, 2012. Kindly

cross check and fine tune legally of these

incorporated points.

Kindly also update me with the diary no/case

no. with next date of hearing.

With Best Regards,

Om prakash Poddar



Jai Bansal

<[email protected]>

Wed, Feb 1, 2012

at 10:14 AM


Dear Mr. Poddar,

Enclosed please find the final version of the

draft petition. I have removed the RTI

application and filing of the complaint against

the judge. These things will go adverse to our

interest and basically we have to file the case

on the merits of the pleadings not on the basis

that we have filed a complaint against the

judge.

As per my opinion these all documents need not

to be filed in the appeal hence the same are

removed.

Further, we are seeking divorce against the

Respondent not against the family members of

the respondent. Hence writing so much about

them is not required in each and every

paragraph.

Rest facts are same.

Matt_Appeal_comment_incorporated.doc

91K

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=135373a193da2f15&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy3vgarx0&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=135373a193da2f15&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy3vgarx0&safe=1&zw


Attn: Advocate Mr. Jai Bansal

Om Prakash Poddar

<[email protected]>

Wed, Feb 1, 2012

at 8:36 PM


Dear Sir,

Please find enclosed the translated copy of

letter(s) written and annexed with the

original petition. Please also find attached

the soft copy of original petition as per

your instruction.

Reply of your telephonic conversation:

Sir,

Kindly refer our telephonic discussion you

had with me today morning. You informed me

that you have struck down my incorporated

comments pertaining to Judges Nexus with

Respondent and RTI stuff. You further said

that it will be rejected if I abuse one Judge

in front of the other Judge. I will not be

given relief.

Sir, I had assessed the matter on the very

first day when you defended the acts of

Judges and pin pointed against me for RTIs

against the Judges. On the same date, I had

reminded you that 30th May is the bone of

contention and black day for the

constitution.

You reminded me thrice i.e. 10th of Jan, 31

st

of Jan and 1st of Feb but I kept silent just

to reply you back in writing.

Sir, I have nothing personal against any

Judges. Sir, Judges are considered to be “God

of the earth” “Panch Parmeshwar” Even I

thought of so. Sir, 23 years of my stay in

Delhi cannot raise any figure against my

personality. I have been associated one or

the other way with the Government machinery.

I have never had conflict with Government

machinery in any form. I have always played a

defensive role. Our professional training is

based on the philosophy of synergy between

the institutions of State, Market and Civil

society.

Even personally, I have great regard for Ms

Deepa Sharma. I am very much sympathetic

towards her disturbed personal life. Sir, I

did not go for filing court complaint. Even I

did not go for filing cases U/s 156(3)

against Respondent.

However, at the same time, I am absolutely

against the Mafia state.

Justification for Nexus:

Sir, I am not talking in the air. Deepa

Sharma conducted investigation against me.

Tapped my CV and arranged an interview with

the lawyer’s organization in Saket. She got

it verified by sending a high court judge’s

driver, Mr. Brajesh Yadav, who happened to be

resident of same Raj Nagar, Palam Colony and

my previous landlord/rent owner.

Mr. Brajesh kumar briefed me everything that

Deepa Sharma was called on by Retd. Chief

Justice of Delhi High Court, Mr. S.B.Sinha at

his residence, in New Delhi. Justice sinha

with French bearded property dealer of Delhi

took the class of Deepa Sharma.

The mastermind of whole game is Justice Sinha

of Delhi High court. Direction came from the

top. Deepa Sharma is just following the

instruction of top brass white color

criminals, who takes the salary of people but

follow the instruction of Mafias.

She even tried to prove me mentally

challenged and ill. Her man, Mr. Brajesh

Yadav asked me to go to Ram Manohar Lohia

Hospital with decided doctor with his mobile

no. in psychiatry department. He further

said, if you produce mentally ill certificate

before Deepa Sharma then she will decide the

case in favour of you on 6th June, 2011

itself.

Justification for RTIs:

Nothing to be said much because everything is

written in the appeal with reason which is

lying with you. But let me answer your

pursuance for not to file RTIs against

Judges.

Sir, I will keep on filing RTIs till you

become accountable towards your profession. I

will keep on doing advocacy for Judicial

Accountability.

Sir, I am living in the jurisdiction of Ms

Deepa Sharma. She has got all powers and

connections. You may please ask her to kill

me in the encounter. I am open to face even

that.

Justification for rejection of my appeal:

Sir, I am least bother about the rejection

part. I have decided to reach up till Supreme

Court of India and then join Naxal outfit.

Now, Sir, you have taken my sign and I have

submitted you all documents as per your

instruction, you also assured me to file as

it is finalized on 31st Jan, at your chamber.

Suddenly you changed your mind in the next

morning. Now the ball is in the court of

DHCLSC. Now, it is up to you and DHCLSC as to

how you people play it. I am just testing the

institutions.

However, I am badly shocked by your advocacy

for defending judicial corruption. You are

the apex court practitioner. Tomorrow, you

will be the trend setter. You are the

custodian of society, saviors of

constitution, and a change maker. What kind

of society you want to produce? A Banana

State!!

People keep great expectation from Apex

court. You are supposed to give guidelines

and ensure implementation for clean lower

court process. Ironically, you are defending

the unconstitutional acts of Judges.

God bless you!!!

With Best Regards,

--

Om Prakash Poddar

2 attachments

copy of letters_translated.doc

40K

Om_Prakash_-_Vs[1]._-

_Rina_kumari_(Divorce)_Final_25_10_2010.doc

105K

Om Prakash

Poddar

<om.poddar@gmail

.com>

Attn: Advocate Mr. Jai Bansal

Jai Bansal

<[email protected]>

Thu, Feb 2, 2012

at 8:39 AM


Dear Mr. Poddar,

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=13539739e85cb970&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy53op2q0&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=13539739e85cb970&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy53op2q0&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=13539739e85cb970&attid=0.2&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy53pv2f1&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?view=att&th=13539739e85cb970&attid=0.2&disp=attd&realattid=f_gy53pv2f1&safe=1&zw

There is nothing unconstitutional or

constitutional in filing complaints for no

reason against the Judges. Further, there is

no point in taking these grounds in appellate

court as your case is decided on the merits

of the case and will be challanged on the

merits of the case.

Please do not worry. Lets file the case on

the merits of the case, rather than harping

on the grounds that do not exist and will not

help us for any reason in the appellate

court.

There is a separate process of filing of

complaints against the Judges if your

aggrieved by any of their conduct,

whatsoever. But certainly that cannot become

a grounds to agitate the same in the appeal

of a dismissed case for getting relief from

the appellate court.

Regards,

--


Chamber No. 105,

New Lawyers Chamber,

Supreme Court of India,

New Delhi - 110001

Ph:- 09868566649

Residence Ph: 011 45644812

Email: [email protected]

https://mail.google.com/mail/h/1srn8mw54hogp/?&v=b&cs=wh&[email protected]

ANNEXURE AA-3 Date: 07/02/2012

Ref: F.No.3945/DHCLSC/2012 dated 09/01/2012.

From:

Om Prakash Poddar

R/O RZF-893, Netaji Subhas Marg

Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam Colony,

New Delhi-10077

Mob: 9968337815

E-mail: [email protected]

To,

The Secretary,


Room No.33 to 38, Lawyers Chambers,

High Court of Delhi, New Delhi- 110003,

Sub: Undue delay in filing appeal and

misleading

information furnished by the Advocate

Dear Sir/Madam,

This is with reference to the Divorce suit No.

700/2010 later renumbered as 678/2010 by the

Family Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi. I am the

petitioner, filed the divorce petition seeking

dissolution of marriage with the respondent U/s

13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on

25.10.2010 in Ms Deepa Sharma, Principal Judge,

Family Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi, however,

the Judgment is being passed of Judicial

Separation U/s 10 of Hindu Marriage Act.

Respondent fought (one and half year) proxy war

through Ms. Deepa Sharma, Principal Judge,

Family Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi.

Respondent was Ex-Parte, yet, she took the

Judgment in favour of her. It is a sheer case

of Judicial Corruption and muscle flexing.

Principal Judge, Ms Deepa Sharma, Family Court,

Dwarka Court, New Delhi had stopped the whole

court proceedings on 30th May 2011 on the date

of filing of WS by the Respondent and had not

sit and chaired any of the cases, in turn, the

order sheet had been generated alleging the

petitioner for requesting for adjournment of

the court proceeding.

Consequently, I have approached the Delhi High

Court Legal Service Committee (DHCLSC) on 4th

of January, 2012 for filing an appeal. However,

the Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee

(DHCLSC) has provided me the Advocate Mr. Jai

Bansal vide letter No. F.No.3945/DHCLSC/2012 on

09/01/2012. Now, the request for filing an

appeal is pending before DHCLSC since then.

Even after my pursuance with number of emails

for one month, no action has been taken so far.

In view of the above, I need information on the

following:

1. Why Delhi High Court Legal Service

Committee (DHCLSC) is not filing my

appeal? The request is pending with vide

letter no. F.No.3945/DHCLSC/2012 dated

09/01/2012. It is pending since 4th of

January, 2012.

2. Why the counsel provided by DHCLSC is not

willing to file my appeal as per the draft

finalized by me on 31st January, 2012.

3. Why the legal Aid counsel took my sign on

Vakalatnama and Affidavit with an

assurance of finalized draft on 31st

January, 2012 at his Supreme Court Chamber

and changed his mind in the next morning.

(Email of communication with Advocate

attached)

4. Why Legal Aid Advocate, Mr. Jai Bansal,

Chamber No.105, New Lawyer’s Chamber,

Supreme Court of India, New Delhi has

removed the facts and justification for

nexus of Judges with the Respondent from

the finalized draft of my Matt Appeal

without my consent?

5. Why Legal Aid Advocate is willing to

conceal the material facts to defend the

acts of abuse of court process by the

Judges and to present the distorted

picture of my case before High Court?

6. Why Legal Aid Advocate has furnished a

false Diary No.21996 on 3rd February, 2012

while no case found by this diary no. in

the website of Delhi High court?

7. Why Legal Aid Advocate has furnished a

false email stating that the case is

listed on 8th February in the court of

Justice Veena Birbal i.e. court no. 25 of

Delhi High Court for arguments on notice

to the other parties. While as per the

cause list (attached for 8th Feb) no case

is listed in my name.

8. Why I have been harassed unnecessarily?

Om Prakash Poddar

Enclosures sent through email:

1. Letter of Legal Aid by Delhi High Court

Legal Service Committee

2. Email of communication with Advocate

attached

3. Cause list for 8th Feb, 2012.

Date: 26/04/2012

Ref: F.No.3945/DHCLSC/2012 dated 09/01/2012.

From:

Om Prakash Poddar



New Delhi-10077

Mob: 9968337815


To,

The Chairman,


Room No.33 to 38, Lawyers Chambers,

High Court of Delhi, New Delhi- 110003,

Sub: Abuse of court process by the Legal Aid

Advocate

Hon’ble Sir/Madam,

This is with reference to the complaint to the

Secretary of Delhi High Court Legal Service

Committee dated 7/02/2012.

In spite of my complaint against the abuse of

court process by way of concealing the material

facts before the Hon’ble High Court by the

Legal Aid Advocate on 7th February, 2012 to the

Secretary, DHCLSC, a wrong petition has been

instituted before the Hon’ble High Court on

08/02/2012 vide case No. MAT APPL 7/2012.

However, I had requested to file a petition

against the abuse of Trial Court process

subsequently finalized the draft petition

accordingly.

But the abuse of Trial Court matter was removed

without my consent and even a MAT appeal being

filed to delay the matter instead of filing

writ against the abuse of power by the public

authority. I was misled by the Advocate and

being denied Justice.

Case Status in brief:-

Delhi Trial court case No. HMA 700/2010 &

678/2010

Delhi High Court Case No. MAT APPL. 7/2012

1. Respondent is ex parte (even did not file

WS: written statement)

2. However, Judgment is being passed in favour

of Respondent and against the petitioner.

3. There is an abuse of Trial Court Process.

4. Principal Judge of Trial Court has stopped

the whole court proceeding on 30th May 2011 and

in turn a false order sheet is being generated

alleging the petitioner for requesting for

adjournment of the court proceedings.

5. RTI has been filed and unsatisfactory reply

has been furnished by the office of the

principal Judge of Trial court against the

unconstitutional and undemocratic act of PJ of

Trial Court.

6. There is an abuse of court process by way of

concealing the material facts by the Advocate

of Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee.

Legal Aid Advocate has admitted this fact in

his email communication. Advocate misled me and

filed MAT APPL instead of filing Writ against

the abuse of power by the public authority.

In view of the above, I pray for your kind

intervention into this matter to take

appropriate action against this act to deliver

proper Justice to the Appellant.

Appellant

Om Prakash Poddar

Encl Above:

1. True Copy of Receiving of Complaint letter

to the Secretary of Delhi High Court Legal

Service Committee. (Pages from 04 to 05)

2. True copy of email communication wherein

the Legal Aid Advocate has admitted the fact of

concealing and removing the material fact.

(Pages from 06 to 18)

3. Order Sheet of 30th May which had been

generated without court proceedings. (Pages

from 19 to 19)

4. RTI reply from the office of the Principal

Judge of Trial Court. (Pages from 20 to 23)

_______________________________________________

____

Track Result for:ED404576545IN Track More

Booked at Booked On Delivered

at

Delivered

on

RAJ NAGAR II 27/04/2012 LODI ROAD

H.O 03/05/2012 Details

Date Time Status at Status

27/04/2012 10:35:47 RAJ NAGAR

II Item Booked

27/04/2012 15:57:47 RAJ NAGAR

II

Item bagged for NEW

DELHI

02/05/2012 09:07:38 NEW DELHI Bag Received

02/05/2012 09:09:05 NEW DELHI Bag Opened

02/05/2012 14:08:54 NEW DELHI Item bagged for LODI

ROAD H.O

03/05/2012 04:58:07 NEW DELHI Bag Despatched to LODI

ROAD H.O

03/05/2012 09:14:05 LODI ROAD

H.O Bag Received

03/05/2012 09:14:30 LODI ROAD

H.O Bag Opened

03/05/2012 09:14:31 LODI ROAD

H.O Item Received

03/05/2012 00:00:00 LODI ROAD

H.O Item Delivered

DELHI STATE LEGAL SERVICE AUTHORITY

Central Office, Pre fab Building Patiala House

Courts New Delhi

Permanent Legal Service Clinic

Shaheed Bhagat Singh Place

Room No.59-66 Gole Market, New Delhi.

Tel No. 011-23341111/23342223

Dated: 28.08.2012

F.NO.54/DSLSA/RTI(Aug-12)/12-13/5815

To,

Shri Om Prakash Poddar,

R/O RZF-893, Netaji Subhas Marg,


New Delhi-110077

Mobile No.9968337815

Sub: Information under the RTI Act, 2005

Sir,

The undersigned received an application dated

10.08.2012 regarding supply of information

under the Right to Information Act 2005. The

asked information is as under:

1. No action has been taken on the complaint dated 07.02.2012 & 03.05.2012 as the same

were not found worthy of any action.

However, on receipt of the complaint

dated 07.02.2012 Mr. Jai Bansal, Advocate

was called for discussion and he

clarified that the appeal which was to be

filed before the High Court of Delhi

could not be barred by limitations.

2. Mr. Jai Bansal, Ld. Advocate informed the

Committee office that due to some urgent

work he had to go out of station and

therefore he tried to contact Mr. Om

Prakash Poddar. Since he could not reach

Mr. Poddar on his phone, he moved the

slip for adjournment. He also informed

that no material proceeding was expected

to take place on 06.07.2012.

3. Same as 2 above

4. No such request has been received in

Delhi Legal Service Committee. However,

you can download the copy of order from

website of Delhi High Court of Delhi.

As per section 19 of the Right to Information

Act, 2005, you may like to file an appeal

within thirty days from issue of this order to

the First Appellate Authority whose address is

given below:

Ms. Asha Menon

1st Appellate Authority

Delhi State Legal Service Authority

Central Office at 1st floor

Pre-Fab Building

Patiala House Court,

N.Delhi

(Kusum Sharma)

Public Information Officer

Encl:Receipt No. 68104 dated 23.08.2012

DELHI STATE LEGAL SERVICE AUTHORITY

Central Office, Pre fab Building Patiala House

Courts New Delhi-110001

Permanent Legal Service Clinic

Shaheed Bhagat Singh Place

Room No.59-66 Gole Market, New Delhi.

Tel No. 011-23341111/23342223

Dated: 24.09.2012

F.NO.12/RTI(Appeal-Sep-12)/12-13/5972

To,

Shri Om Prakash Poddar,

R/O RZF-893, Netaji Subhas Marg,


New Delhi-110077

Sub: Copy of order dated 17.09.2012

RTI Appeal No.12/RTI Appeal (September-

12)/12-

13

Sir,

With reference to your appeal dated 31.08.2012

under RTI Act-2005, I am directed to forward

herewith a copy of order dated 17.09.2012

passed by Ld. 1st Appellate Authority, Delhi

State Legal Service Authority for your

information.

Thanking you,

Yours

Sincerely,

Superintendent (Admin.)

Encl.: as above

Copy to:-

The PIO/Superintendent (Legal Aid), Gole

Market, New Delhi.

Superintendent (Admin.)

IN THE MATTER OF SH. OM PRAKASH PODDAR

RTI APPEAL NO. 12/RTI Appeal (September-12)/12-

13

17.09.2012

ORDER

This order will dispose of the First Appeal

under RTI Act, 2005 filed by Shri Om Prakash

Poddar against the reply of the PIO, DSLSA to

the application of the appellant for

information.

Shri Om Prakash Poddar was present in person as

was Ms. Kusum Sharma, PIO, DSLSA. The

application was moved by Shri Om Prakash Poddar

for filing relevant documents. The same has

been received and placed on file. I have heard

the appellant patiently and gone through the

appeal record as also the documents that he has

filed on 17.09.2012 and have also heard all his

submissions.

Having perused the file including the documents

filed on 17.09.2012 and heard the submission in

detail, I find no merit in the present appeal.

The brief facts as relevant for the disposal of

this appeal are that on 10.08.2012, the

appellant sought certain information from the

PIO, DSLSA. The queries of the appellant and

the responses thereto given by the PIO, DSLSA,

are as under:-

SN Queries Raised by the

Appellant

Response of

PIO,DSLSA

1. What action has been

taken against the

complaint of

Petitioner dated

7/2/2012 and

03/05/2012 so far?

5. No action has

been taken on

the complaint

dated

07.02.2012 &

03.05.2012 as

the same were

not found

worthy of any

action.

However, on

receipt of the

complaint

dated

07.02.2012 Mr.

Jai Bansal,

Advocate was

called for

discussion and

he clarified

that the

appeal which

was to be

filed before

the High Court

of Delhi could

not be barred

by

limitations.

2. Why neither Legal Aid

Advocate nor his any

substitute was present

on the date of hearing

on 6/7/2012 in vide

case no. MAT. APPL.

7/2012?

Mr. Jai Bansal, Ld.

Advocate informed

the Committee office

that due to some

urgent work he had

to go out of station

and therefore he

tried to contact Mr.

Om Prakash Poddar.

Since he could not

reach Mr. Poddar on

his phone, he moved

the slip for

adjournment. He also

informed that no

material proceeding

was expected to take

place on 06.07.2012.

3. Why Legal Aid

Advocate, DHCLSC filed

adjournment slip on

behalf of Appellant on

the date of hearing on

06/07/2012 without the

information and

consent of Appellant,

when there is a

serious complaint

against its Secretary

and Advocate to the

Chairman and when

there is a complaint

in SLP (C) 9854/2012

against them?

Same as 2 above.

4. Why DHCLSC has not

supplied the certified

copies of Order dated

06/07/2012 and

08/02/2012 to the

No such request has

been received in

Delhi High Court

Legal Service

Committee. However,

petitioner so far, in

spite of his repeated

request?

you can download the

copy of order from

website of High

Court of Delhi.

Dissatisfied with this response, the appellant

has filed the instant appeal submitting therein

that the information has been withheld or

supplied unsatisfactorily and that therefore,

the same be furnished. It has been submitted in

the appeal that the requested information under

Query No.1 reproduced above could not be said

to be complete information in view of the

following arguments and reason:-

“Argument and reasons for full information: As

per the complaint dated 07.02.2012 there is an


material facts by the Legal Aid Advocate by

fraud without the consent of petitioner before

Delhi High Court. He has admitted this fact in

his email communication to the petitioner. He

further instituted an appeal rather than a writ

or any other legal action best fitted against

the abuse of Trial court process. Moreover,

Secretary, DHCLSC has allowed his Advocate to

institute a wrong petition on 8/2/2012 before

Delhi High Court even after written complaint

to the Secretary, DHCLSC on 7/2/2012. The

complaint of 03.05.2012 is against the

Secretary, DHCLSC to the Chairman, DHCLSC which

contains the abuse of power by the Secretary.

Hence, the information supplied is misleading,

false and frivolous”.

Thereafter the appellant has submitted and

further requested “Hence, true information to

be given in line with below mentioned

questions:-

I. Was writ petition or any other legal action not best fitted into the abuse of Trial

court process as the petitioner had come

with the grievances of abuse of Trial court

process to the DHCLSC on 04/01/2012?

II. Is filing a petition by Mr. Jai Bansal, by way of concealing the material fact by

fraud without the consent of petitioner not

an abuse of court process?

III. Is allowing Advocate, Mr. Jai Bansal by the Secretary, DHCLSC to institute a wrong

petition on 8/2/2012 before Delhi High

Court even after a written complaint to the

Secretary, DHCLSC on 7/2/2012, not an abuse

of vested power by the Secretary, DHCLSC?

IV. Is the above as (i), (ii) and (iii) not

worthy of any action?”

With regard to the second query, reproduced

herein above the arguments and reason submitted

for full information are as follows:-

“Here also the furnished information is

false.

In fact the Petitioner has contacted him

over

his mobile on the date of hearing when he

did

not turn up on the court date even after

verbal assurance in day advance. Moreover,

there was a material proceeding for the

final

order as the notice sent to the

respondent on

08.02.2012 had not been received back.

Therefore, there is a deliberate attempt

of nexus between respondent, DHCLSC and

Judiciary to kill my bedridden with home

oxygen mother, who happens to be last

member of my family, in the similar

fashion as the respondent and her

associates had killed my father in 2007.

Hence, the information supplied is

incomplete and false. Hence, true

information to be given in line with the

following questions:-

I. Can Legal Aid Advocate and DHCLSC move the adjournment slip without written

information and consent of the petitioner?

II. If yes then kindly inform me under which section DHCLSC is authorized to do so, if

not then why without written information

and consent of the petitioner, adjournment

slip being filed by the Advocate within

the knowledge of DHCLSC office?

It has been explained to Shri Om Prakash Poddar

that whether a writ petition or any other legal

action was best suited or fitted into the facts

of his case wherein he alleges that there is

abuse of the trial court process, and whether

it amounted to abuse of court process and

allegedly allowing the advocate to institute

“Writ Petition”, even after a written complaint

to the Secretary was not an abuse of vested

powers of the Secretary, are all questions that

are eliciting an opinion which does not qualify

as information under the RTI Act.

Similarly, the query as to whether a legal aid

advocate could move an adjournment slip without

written information and consent of the

petitioner has already been answered by the

PIO, DSLSA to this effect that as Shri Jai

Bansal, Advocate, could not attend the Court

and was not able to contact the present

appellant, the adjournment slip had been

submitted to the Court.

As regard the query No. (ii) regarding

furnishing the Section under which DHCLSC is

authorized to do so and if there is none, why

the written information and the consent of the

petitioner was not sought is again explained

and replied to by the PIO in response to Query

No. 2 reproduced herein above. In any case,

these do not qualify as information sought.

The appellant appears to be dissatisfied with

the action that has been taken on his

complaints. However, under RTI Act, he is

entitled to know what happened to his

complaints, but cannot dictate or protest

against action taken if he is not satisfied

with such action as has been taken.

Therefore, all his submissions, relying on the

additional documents filed relating to the

proceedings before the Family Court, are not

relevant for the disposal of the present RTI

Appeal.

The appellant may be aggrieved on various

levels on account of his matrimonial

litigation, but that dissatisfaction cannot be

redressed by recourse to the RTI. He has

already approached the Hon’ble High Court and

is desirous to approach the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in SLP against the Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi. That, once again, does not concern the

Appellate Authority under RTI.

Furthermore, the conduct of Shri Jai Bansal in

filing an appeal excluding the allegations that

the present appellant wanted to include in the

pleadings cannot be faulted as Email reveals

that Sh. Jai Bansal refused to include such

averments in the best interest of the client

namely the present appellant.

It is, after considering all aspects, that the

High Court Committee would have filed the two

complaints dated 07.02.2012 and 03.05.2012 and

the dissatisfaction of the appellant to the

action taken can find no redressal under the

RTI Act. Therefore, the additional arguments

and queries (i) to (v) raised in the appeal in

this regard as to whether writ would have been

better or an appeal, or whether adjournment

slip ought not to have been filed without the

written consent of the appellant etc., are not

arguments that are relevant to the present

proceedings.

The First Appellate Authority, as explained to

Sh. Poddar, has only to see whether the replies

given by the PIO, DSLSA, do not indicate any

suppression or misinformation of fact.

In the circumstances, the appeal is found

lacking in merit and is accordingly dismissed.

Copy of this order be sent to Shri Om Prakash

Poddar and the PIO for information.

The file is closed.

As per Section 19 of the Right to Information

Act, 2005, you may like to file an appeal

within 90 days from the issuance of this order

to the second Appellate Authority whose address

is given below.

The Chief Information Commissioner,

Room No. 305, B-Wing,

August Kranti Bhawan,

Bhikaji Cama Place

New Delhi-110066

-sd-

(Asha Menon)

First Appellate Authority

Delhi State Legal Service Authority

Date: 07/10/2012

Ref:F.NO.12/RTI/Appeal-Sep-12)/12/13/5972

From:

Om Prakash Poddar



New Delhi-10077

Mob: 9968337815


To,

The Second Appellate Authority,

The Chief Information Commissioner

Room No. 305, B-Wing,

August Kranti Bhawan

Bhikaji Cama Place

New Delhi-110066

Sub: Second Appeal U/S 19 (1) of RTI Act 2005

Dear Sir/Madam,

I regret that Ms. Asha Menon, 1st Appellate

Authority, Delhi State Legal Service Authority,

New Delhi dismissed the First appeal on the

ground of lacking merit in appeal vide her

letter ref. F.NO.12/RTI/Appeal-Sep-

12)/12/13/5972 dated 24th September, 2012.

Ms.Asha Menon, First Appellate Authority

further says, “she has only to see whether the

replies given by the PIO are correct or not and

in that regard, the answers given by the PIO,

DSLSA, do not indicate any suppression or

misinformation of fact”.

However, answers given by PIO, DSLSA are

incomplete and out of the context. Therefore, I

requested the First Appellate Authority to

furnish the complete information in context/in

line with the below mentioned questions which

is contextual of the original questions and

form part of the same. Without this context,

the furnished information is incomplete.

Under these circumstances, either you can give

it or else you can order her to supply the

same.

Hence, I request you to pass an order to supply

the following Information satisfactorily, or

supply the same as per the rules under RTI Act-

2005. My point wise averments and arguments are

as under:

Requested Information: 1.) What action has been

taken against the complaint of Petitioner dated

7/2/2012 and 03/05/2012 so far??

Supplied Information: 1.) No action has been

taken on the complaint dated 07.02.2012 &

03.05.2012 as the same were not found worthy of

any action. However, on receipt of the

complaint dated 07.02.2012 Mr. Jai Bansal,

Advocate was called for discussion and he

clarified that the appeal which was to be field

before the High Court of Delhi could not be

barred by limitations.

Argument and reasons for full information: As

per the complaint dated 07.02.2012 there is an


material facts by the Legal Aid Advocate by

fraud without the consent of petitioner before

Delhi High Court. He has admitted this fact in

his email communication to the petitioner. He

further instituted an appeal rather than a writ

or any other legal action best fitted against

the abuse of Trial court process. Moreover,

Secretary, DHCLSC has allowed his Advocate to

institute a wrong petition on 8/2/2012 before

Delhi High Court even after written complaint

to the Secretary, DHCLSC on 7/2/2012. The

complaint of 03.05.2012 is against the

Secretary, DHCLSC to the Chairman, DHCLSC which

contains the abuse of power by the Secretary.

Hence, the information supplied is misleading,

false and frivolous. Hence, true information

to be given in line with below mentioned

questions:-

(i) Was writ petition or any other legal action

not best fitted into the abuse of Trial court

process as the petitioner had come with the

grievances of abuse of Trial court process to

the DHCLSC on 04/01/2012?

(ii) Is filing a petition by Mr. Jai Bansal, by

way of concealing the material fact by fraud

without the consent of petitioner not an abuse

of court process?

(iii)Is allowing Advocate, Mr. Jai Bansal by

the Secretary, DHCLSC to institute a wrong

petition on 8/2/2012 before Delhi High Court

even after a written complaint to the

Secretary, DHCLSC on 7/2/2012, not an abuse of

vested power by the Secretary, DHCLSC?

(iv)Is the above as (i), (ii) and (iii) not

worthy of any action?

Requested Information: 2.) Why neither Legal

Aid Advocate nor his any substitute was present

on the date of hearing on 6/7/2012 in vide case

no. MAT. APPL. 7/2012?

Supplied Information: 2.) Mr. Jai Bansal, Ld.

Advocate informed the Committee office that

due to some urgent work he had to go out of

station and therefore he tried to contact Mr.

Om Prakash Poddar. Since he could not reach Mr.

Poddar on his phone, he moved the slip for

adjournment. He also informed that no material

proceeding was expected to take place on

06.07.2012.

Argument and reasons for full information: Here

also the furnished information is false. In

fact the Petitioner has contacted him over his

mobile on the date of hearing when he did not

turn up on the court date even after verbal

assurance in day advance. Moreover, there was a

material proceeding for the final order as the

notice sent to the respondent on 08.02.2012 had

not been received back. Therefore, there is a

deliberate attempt of nexus between respondent,

DHCLSC and Judiciary to kill my bedridden with

home oxygen mother, who happens to be last

member of my family, in the similar fashion as

the respondent and her associates had killed my

father in 2007.

Hence, the information supplied is incomplete

and false. Hence, true information to be given

in line with the following questions:-

(i) Can Legal Aid Advocate and DHCLSC move the

adjournment slip without written information

and consent of the petitioner?

(ii) If yes then kindly inform me under which

section DHCLSC is authorized to do so, if not

then why without written information and

consent of the petitioner, adjournment slip

being filed by the Advocate within the

knowledge of DHCLSC office?

Om Prakash Poddar

Petitioner

Encl:

1. Second Appeal RTI application. (Page 01 to

04)

2. Online generated Documents of CIC. (Page

05 to 09)

3. Details of BPL Proof-Affidavit of Income.

(Page 10 to 10)

4. RTI Reply from PIO DSLSA, New Delhi. (Page

11 to 11)

5. RTI Reply from First Appellate Authority,

DSLSA, New Delhi. (Page 12 to 19)

ANNEXURE AA-4

First appeal under Section 19 (1) of the RTI Act – 2005. Date: 08/09/2011 Ref: NO. 4941/RTI/FC/DWK/2011 dated 30th August, 2011 From: Om Prakash Poddar C/O Digvijay Singh R/O RZH-757, 1st Floor, Lane No.14, Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam Colony, New Delhi-10077 Mob:9868797201 E-mail: [email protected] To, The First Appellate Authority, Ms. Poonam A. Bamba Ld. Judge-02, Family Courts Rohini Court, Delhi-110085 North West District Sub: First Appeal U/S 19 (1) of RTI Act 2005 Dear Madam, I thank Ms. Sunita Gosain, PIO/Administrative Officer, Family Courts, Dwarka, New Delhi for her reply and giving some of the valuable information on the subject matter, vide her letter ref. No. 4941/RTI/FC/DWK/2011 dated 30th August, 2011, received by hand on 6th September, 2011 I think most of the information she has kept it reserved or supplied unsatisfactorily, so that either you can give it or else you can order her to supply the same. Hence, I request you Madam, to pass an order to supply the following Information satisfactorily, or supply the same as per the rules under RTI Act-2005. My point wise averments and arguments are as under: Requested Information: 1.) Why there was no court proceedings, Principal Judge did not sit and chair any of the cases on 30.05.2011? Supplied Information: 1.) Ld. Judge held/chaired the court on 30.05.2011 and disposed of all cases. Argument and reasons for full information: As per the Police complaint made by me on 30.05.2011 and received by Dwarka Court Police Chowki at 2.15 pm and speed posted to Principal Judge, Family Court, Dwarka Court when I was stopped and beaten by the goons of respondent family at the entry gate of Dwarka Court is the evident of the fact that I was the eye witness of deadlock of court proceedings on 30th May, 2011. I have left the court premises at 4.30 pm. Till then there was no court proceedings and Principal Judge did not sit, reader was giving the next date which I have complained to President’s helpline vide registration no. PRSEC/E/2011/08975 dated 7th June, 2011. Hence, the false Order Sheet of 30.05.2011 has been generated by the PJ in view of the Police Complaint of 30th May 2011. Yet, Principal Judge claims to hold/chair the court on 30.05.2011 then I would request you to supply the list of cases with full details disposed of on the same date.

Requested Information: 2.) Can the Family Judge exercise substantial judgment against the petitioner by way of waiting for 8 months for WS filing by the respondent, who is acting under the influence of respondent and her associates, cornering the critical health situation of applicant’s mother and persistent life threat to the petitioner for 7 years by the respondent and her associates? Supplied Information: 2.) The Family court Judge can extend the period for filling for Written Statement (WS) in view of Section 10(3) of Family Court Act. Ld. Judge does not act under the influence of any party to the suit and also does not ignore plea of any party. Argument and reasons for full information: Here also she claims her discretion to extend. But she does not disclose whether there was a written request from the respondent to extend this time frame or not. When respondent or her counsel is not present on any date after 9th Feb, 2011 then how come PJ can use her discretion of extending the time frame for WS filling. Moreover the Ld Judge has ignored the plea of petitioner is evident from the Police complaint of criminal conspiracy dated 30th May, 2011 and 6th June, 2011 which has been speed posted to Principal Judge, Family Court, Dwarka Court. Secondly, the two applications with list of documents submitted by the petitioner on 6th June, 2011 envisaging the critical health situation of his ailing old age mother as evident from the Order Sheet of 6th June, 2011. Even PJ has refused to take the witnesses and ex-parte evidence on 7th September, 2011 as indicated in the Order Sheet of 6th June, 2011. I was present with all the three witnesses viz. old age ailing mother, eldest sister and friend physically on 7th September, 2011. Respondent again was not present. The Affidavit of witnesses of 7th September 2011 is evident that the witnesses were present before the PJ Court and PJ intentionally refused to accept the Affidavit. It reveals and substantiates her association/nexus with the respondent and her mafia gang. This clearly shows the crushing mentality of PJ. Hence, the information supplied is incomplete and false. Hence, true information to be given. Requested Information: 3.) Why the Petitioner has been alleged for adjournment of the Court on 30th May 2011, while there was no court proceeding on the same date and when the petitioner has made huge hue and cry against the deadlock of court proceeding? Supplied Information: 3.) It is informed that why the petitioner had made the request for adjournment is the fact within the knowledge of petitioner. The order-sheet shows the petitioner had made a request for adjournment. Moreover, matter was not fixed for petitioner’s evidence on 30.05.2011. Argument and reasons for full information: Supplied information clearly shows that the Principal Judge has either lost her mental balance or she is not competent enough to hold the responsible post. PJ is able to say this because the daily order sheet of PJ Family Court is not made public through e-governance. Had the daily order sheet been put on the website then there would not have been any hassle for a common man. In the absence of inclusion of PJ Family Court’s proceeding in the e- governance framework creates mesh and pains to the common man.

I have not made any request for adjournment of the court proceeding because I believe in constitution and against of Banana/Mafia State. Moreover, the Order sheet is written on the direction of PJ and not on the direction of Petitioner. As the respondent was absent on 30.05.2011 and the matter was fixed for WS filling by the respondent therefore Petitioner had right to plea for ex-parte the case. Hence, petitioner’s presence was imperative. PJ’s intentional absence was unconstitutional. Hence, the information supplied is false and fabricated. Hence, supply the true information. Om Prakash Poddar Enclosures:

1. RTI application.

2. Copy Reply from PIO/Administrative Officer, Family Courts,

Dwarka, New Delhi

3. Requisite fees of Rs. 10/- IPO No. 47C229135 dated 10.09.2011

and 47C229156 dated 10.09.2011.

Copy forwarded for information to First Appellate Authority, Shri Ramesh Abhishek, Joint Secretary (J-I), R.No.1,Main Building, Jaisalmer House,26,Mansingh Road, New Delhi-110011 and Appellate Authority, Registrar (Establishment), Delhi Court, New Delhi, Room No.101, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi as the application was transferred from the O/o Sh. R. K. Agarwal, Deputy Secretary & CPIO, Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice Rf. No.L.15020/136/2011-Jus dated 1st August, 2011 and from the O/o Sh. K.K. Nangia, the Public Information Officer, Delhi High Court, New Delhi, Ref No. 23070/RTI/DHC/521/11 dated 8th August, 2011.

First appeal under Section 19 (1) of the RTI Act – 2005.

Date: 12/09/2011 Ref: NO. 4939/RTI/FC/DWK/2011 dated 30th August, 2011 From: Om Prakash Poddar C/O Digvijay Singh R/O RZH-757, 1st Floor, Lane No.14, Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam Colony, New Delhi-10077 Mob: 9868797201 E-mail: [email protected] To, The First Appellate Authority, Ms. Poonam A. Bamba Ld. Judge-02, Family Courts Rohini Court, Delhi-110085 North West District Sub: First Appeal U/S 19 (1) of RTI Act 2005 Dear Madam, I thank Ms. Sunita Gosain, PIO/Administrative Officer, Family Courts, Dwarka, New Delhi for her reply and giving some of the valuable information on the subject matter, vide her letter ref. No. 4939/RTI/FC/DWK/2011 dated 30th August, 2011, received by hand on 6th September, 2011 I think most of the information she has kept it reserved or supplied unsatisfactorily, so that either you can give it or else you can order her to supply the same. Hence, I request you Madam, to pass an order to supply the following Information satisfactorily, or supply the same as per the rules under RTI Act-2005. My point wise averments and arguments are as under: Requested Information: 1.) Why the Petitioner is being stopped and refused by the Principal Judge, Family Court to file the self- Affidavit of ex-parte evidence on 1st of August, 2011 as the next date of hearing is fixed on 7th September, 2011? Supplied Information: 1.) As is clear from order sheet dated 06/06/2011, the Ld. Judge did not stop & refused to take self-affidavit of applicant on record. Whatever documents were filled by him, were taken on record along with two applications. It is further clear that on 06.06.2011, the matter was not fixed for the petitioner evidence. Argument and reasons for full information: Order sheet of 06.06.2011 has no relation with the supplied information. As the self-Affidavit of ex-parte evidence of 1st August, 2011 needed to be filed for the next date of hearing fixed on 07.09.2011. As per the order sheet of 6th June, 2011, respondent is proceeded ex-parte, for ex-parte evidence, to come up on 07.09.2011. Therefore it was my democratic right to file the affidavit of ex-parte evidence before 7th September, 2011 in view of a reasonable apprehension in mind for cancellation of ex-parte by the respondent. I agree, on 06.06.2011, the matter was fixed for respondent but when none for the respondent was present then it became imperative for the

petitioner to plea for ex-parte the suit. Petitioner strongly pleaded that his life and his ailing mother’s life are under persistent threat (Police Complaint speed posted to PJ). Respondent family is playing delay and manipulation tactics, so ex-parte the suit. Moreover, the petitioner had already experienced the worst part of judicial system by way of stopping the whole court proceedings on 30th May 2011 by the Principal Judge herself. 30th May was fixed for respondent to file WS after a gap of 3 months but “replication not filed” is written by PJ on false generated order sheet. Surprisingly, again PJ admits and writes on the order sheet of 6th June, 2011 that WS has also not been filed by the respondent. I failed to understand her majesty/excellency. Is replication filed before WS? Please enlighten this poor uneducated common man. Surprisingly, even on 07.09.2011, PJ refused to accept Affidavit and witnesses of ex-parte evidence. Petitioner was present with all his three witnesses viz. old age ailing mother, eldest sister and friend physically before PJ as evident from the affidavit of witnesses of 7th September, 2011. Even my asthmatic mother had minor attack of asthma in the court premises on the same date. Yet, PJ refused because I dare to seek information through RTI against her unlawful work. Hence, the information supplied is incomplete and false. Hence, true information to be given. Requested Information: 2.) Is Principal Judge, Family Court not coming under the preview of District Judge administratively? Supplied Information: 2.) Principal Judge, Family Court does not come under the preview of District Judge, administratively. Argument and reasons for full information: Well, if PJ Family Court does not come under the preview of District Judge, administratively then under whom PJ come administratively? PJ is answerable to whom? Hence, the information supplied is incomplete. Hence, complete information to be given. Requested Information: 3.) Why the Principal Judge, Family Court, New Delhi is using all possible unconstitutional tools to crush the democratic right of the petitioner when he has reasonable apprehension in his mind? Supplied Information: 3.) Principal Judge, Family Courts, Dwarka is not using any unconstitutional tools while dealing with the matter. Argument and reasons for full information: Stopping to file and refusing to accept the affidavit and list of documents of ex-parte evidence on 1st August, 2011 and not letting the petitioner to tender his witnesses present physically, witnesses came all the way from 2000 k.m on 7th September, 2011, is not an abuse of her discretionary power. Is this act not amounting to undemocratic and unconstitutional? Without any reason and written request by the Petitioner transferring the case to another Family court on 07.09.2011, just to avoid tendering the witnesses present physically, does not show her crushing mentality to delay and manipulate the case as per the desire of the respondent family? Paralyzing the whole court proceedings and misleading the democratic institution by generating the false Order Sheet of 30th May, 2011 is not unconstitutional?

In view of the above citation kindly supply me information on the following: 1. Can Principal Judge stop the petitioner to file Affidavit of ex-parte

evidence prior to the date of hearing?

2. Can Principal Judge avoid tendering the witnesses present

physically on the date of hearing of 7th September?

3. Can Principal Judge transfer the case without any written request

by the petitioner on the date of hearing of ex-parte evidence on 7th

September, 2011?

Hence, the information supplied is false, fabricated and incomplete. Hence, supply the complete information. Om Prakash Poddar Enclosures:

4. RTI application.

5. Copy Reply from PIO/Administrative Officer, Family Courts,

Dwarka, New Delhi

6. Requisite fees of Rs. 10/- IPO No. 92E347815 dated 12.09.2011.

Copy forwarded for information to First Appellate Authority, Shri Ramesh Abhishek, Joint Secretary (J-I), R.No.1,Main Building, Jaisalmer House,26,Mansingh Road, New Delhi-110011 and Appellate Authority, Registrar (Establishment), Delhi Court, New Delhi, Room No.101, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi as the application was transferred from the O/o Sh. R. K. Agarwal, Deputy Secretary & CPIO, Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice Rf. No.L.15020/136/2011-Jus dated 9th August, 2011 and from the O/o Sh. K.K. Nangia, the Public Information Officer, Delhi High Court, New Delhi, Ref No. 23484/RTI/DHC/544/11 dated 12th August, 2011.

Information seeking under Right to Information Act 2005 Date: 17/09/2011 Ref: H.M.A. No.700/2010 Order Sheet dated 7th September, 2011 From: Om Prakash Poddar C/O Digvijay Singh R/O RZH-757, 1st Floor, Lane No.14, Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam Colony, New Delhi-10077 Mob: 9868797201 E-mail: [email protected] To, The PIO/Administrative Officer, Ms. Sunita Gosain Family Courts, Dwarka Dwarka Court, New Delhi-110075 South West District Sub: Information seeking under Right to Information Act 2005 Dear Madam, As per the Order Sheet (attached) of 7th September, 2011, Hon’ble Principal Judge, Ms Deepa Sharma, Family Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi has alleged the petitioner that the petitioner has submitted that he has filed one complaint against this court and has made a request to transfer the matter to some other court. Principal Judge informed the petitioner that he has filed a complaint against this court therefore she will not tender his ex-parte evidence. Secondly, the petitioner has submitted that the counsel of the petitioner Mr. Satya Prakash, Delhi Legal Service Authority, Dwarka refused to come on the date of hearing of 7th September, 2011 but Principal Judge did not take it on the record. Later, the petitioner has complained the same to the Secretary, DLSA, Dwarka on the same date. However, on 07.09.2011, Principal Judge refused to accept petitioner’s Affidavit and tender the witnesses of ex-parte evidence. Petitioner was present with all his three witnesses viz. old age ailing mother, eldest sister and friend physically before Principal Judge as evident from the affidavit of witnesses of 7th September, 2011. Even the petitioner’s asthmatic mother had minor asthma attack in the court premises on the same date. Yet, Principal Judge refused because I dared to seek information through RTI against her unlawful work. Petitioner requested to tender his ex-parte evidence and his all three witnesses present physically before the Principal Judge court that had pained to come all the way from 2000 km but Principal Judge did not pay any heed to his request and transferred the case to another Family Court. It was just a delaying tactics of Principal Judge to avoid tendering the witnesses. In view of the above, kindly supply me information on the following:

1) Can Principal Judge transfer the case without any written request

by the petitioner to transfer the case to another Family Court, just to

avoid tendering the witnesses of the petitioner to delay the case for

another 3 months?

2) Supply Copy of the Transfer request of the suit made by the

Petitioner as claimed by Principal Judge as per the Order Sheet of

7th September, 2011.

Om Prakash Poddar Enclosures:

7. RTI application.

8. Copy of Order Sheet of 7th September, 2011

9. Requisite fees of Rs. 10/- IPO No. 92E347724 dated 17.09.2011

ANNEXURE AA-

5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

C.M.NO. 20465 OF 2012

MATT.APPL. 7 OF 2012 IN THE MATTER OF: Om Prakash Poddar …………………..Appellant

Versus Rina Kumari ………………….Respondent APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 CPC FOR SEEKING EXEMPTION FROM FILING THE CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER DATED 30.05.2011 AND 07.09.2011. MOST RESPECTFULLY SOWETH:

1. That the appellant has filed the accompanying application under Section 28 of HMA, 1955 and application under Order 7 of Rule 14 of CPC for placing on record the additional documents.

2. That the appellant has not filed the certified copy of the order dated 30.05.2011 and 07.09.2011 along with the instant application before this Hon’ble Court and seek exemption from filing the certified copy of the same.

3. That the appellant has filed the photocopy of the aforesaid orders due to the urgency of the matter and the appellant undertakes to file the certified copy of the aforesaid order as and when directed by this Hon’ble Court.

4. That the present application is being moved bonafide and in the interest of justice.

PRAYER It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may exempt the appellant from filing the certified copy of the orders dated 30.05.2011 and 07.09.2011 of Ld. Trial Court and photocopy of the same be taken on record.

Filed by:

Appellant-In-Person

S/O Late Sh. Deep Narayan Poddar R/O RZF-893, Netaji Subhash Marg

Raj Nagar Part-II, Palam Colony New Delhi-110077 Mob: 9968337815

New Delhi Dated: 06.12.2012


C.M.NO. 20465 OF 2012

IN


Versus Rina Kumari ………………….Respondent

AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash Poddar S/o Late D. N. Poddar,

aged 39 years, R/o RZF/893, NetaJi Subash

Marg, Raj Nagar Part-II, Palam Colony, New

Delhi - 77, do hereby solemnly affirm and state

on oath as under:-

1. That I am the Petitioner in the above

matter and well conversant with the facts

of the case as such competent to swear

this affidavit.

2. That the accompanying application u/s 151

CPC for seeking exemption from filing the

certified copy of order dated 30.05.2011

and 07.09.2011 of Ld. Trial Court are true

and correct to the best of my personal

knowledge and belief.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

I, the above-named deponent do hereby verify

that the facts stated in the above affidavit

are true to my knowledge and belief. No part

of the same is false and nothing material has

been concealed therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this the 6th day of

December, 2012.

DEPONENT


C.M.NO. 20465 OF 2012

IN



SERVICE AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash Poddar S/o Late D. N. Poddar, aged 39 years, R/o RZF/893, NetaJi Subash Marg, Raj Nagar Part-II, Palam Colony, New Delhi - 77, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:-

1. That the deponent is the appellant and fully conversant with the facts of the case.

2. That the deponent served the Notice by speed Post Track Result for ED986320975IN dated 04.12.2012 delivered on 08.12.2012 delivered at Barauni Oil Refinery S.O. and receipt issued by Indian Post are enclosed herewith

DEPONENT VERIFICATION: I, the above-named deponent do hereby verify that the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge and belief. No part of the same is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom. Verified at New Delhi on this the 22nd day of Jan, 2013.

DEPONENT



COURT NO.04

NDOH: REGULAR ON 22.01.2013

IN THE MATTER OF:


VS.


INDEX

SN PARTICULARS PAGE

NO.

1 Filled in “Form For Urgent

(Mentioning) Cases For

Listing/Accommodation” in

duplicate.

1-2

2 Application for early date of

hearing under urgent

(Mentioning) Cases for

Listing/Accommodation” u/s 151

CPC (as amended up to date)

3-6

3 Affidavit in support of

Application for urgent listing

matter.

7-8

4 Court Fee@250/-

5 Notice of motion with proof of

Service

9

DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 22.04.2013.

ITEM NO. 11 (to be filled up by CM only)


FORM FOR URGENT (MENTIONING) CASES FOR LISTING

/ ACCOMMODATION

CASE TYPE MAT. APP. 7 OF 2012

OM PRAKASH PODDAR Appellant(s)

- V E R S U S -

RINA KUMARI Respondent(s)

GROUNDS FOR URGENCY AND THE NATURE OF

RELIEF SOUGHT (IN BRIEF):

GROUNDS FOR URGENCY:

1. That the respondent is ex parte and

never ever appeared before the High Court

and the Trial Court except once on

09.02.2011 at the Trail court only. Notice

has been served and service affidavit with

proof of delivery receipt has been put on

record on 22.01.2013 vide diary no. 2376.

2. That the life and liberty of the

Appellant is at stake and is reeling under

criminal conspiracy since 10 years by the

respondent and the associates having nexus

with Mafia and Government Machinery.

3. That the Appellant has absolutely been

crushed since 10 years and he does not

have strength to fight back with the

Government Machinery and Mafia any more.

4. That the head of the family of the

Appellant has already been crushed to

death by the respondent and the

associates.

5. That the Appellant does not have any

male or female member in his family and is

alone with ailing bedridden and on home

oxygen old age mother and has been kept

captive without any source of income.

6. That the Appellant is not in a “state of

mind” to earn his livelihood under these

facts and circumstances of the case.


options but to end his life.

THE NATURE OF RELIEF SOUGHT:

1. Dissolution of marriage u/s 13 (1)(ia)

of HMA, 1955; as the petition was filed

u/s 13 (1)(ia) of HMA, 1955 for decree of

divorce and the Judgment was being passed

a decree of judicial separation u/s 10 of

HMA 1955 without the consent of Appellant

while the respondent was ex parte.

AS PER ROSTER, TO BE LISTED BEFORE:

Court No. 04 & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP

NANDRAJOG & HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL

{COURT NO. & THE NAME(S) OF HON’BLEJUDGE(S)}

Trial Court Details (if any) :

1. Against the Order dated : 16.12.2011

2. Passed by : Mr. Deepak Jagotra, Judge

Family Court, Dwarka, New

Delhi

3. In Case No.: H.M.A Case No. 678 of 2010

In Criminal Cases :

1. F.I.R. No. : N.A.

2. Date of F.I.R.: N.A.

3. Police Station: N.A.

4. Under Section : N.A.

Signature __________________________

OM PRAKASH PODDAR

Appellant in Person

RZF-893, NETAJI SUBHAS MARG,

RAJ NAGAR, PART-2, PALAM COLONY,

NEW DELHI PIN:110077

Mobile No. 9968337815

Appellant in Person

Date : 22.04.2013

Place : New Delhi.

_______________________________________________

_________________________________________

FOR THE USE OF COURT / REGISTRY

Remarks / Objections :

Note : To be submitted in duplicate.

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW

DELHI

C.M.NO.6714 OF 2013


Court No.04


IN THE MATTER OF :


VERSUS


APPLICATION FOR EARLY DATE OF HEARING

UNDER URGENT (MENTIONING) CASES FOR

LISTING/ACCOMODATION U/S 151 CPC (AS

AMENDED UP-TO-DATE).

To








respectfully submits this application

seeking early date of hearing against

the impugned common order dated

16.12.2011 passed by the Family Court,

Dwarka of Delhi in HMA Case NO.678 of

2010.

2. That the petition was filed u/s 13

(1)(ia) of HMA, 1955 for decree of

divorce and the Judgment was being

passed a decree of judicial separation

u/s 10 of HMA 1955 without the consent

of Appellant while the respondent was ex

parte.


never ever appeared before the High

Court and the Trial Court except once on

09.02.2011 at the Trail court only.

Notice has been served and service

affidavit with proof of delivery receipt

has been put on record on 22.01.2013

vide diary no. 2376.


Appellant is at stake and is reeling

under criminal conspiracy since 10 years

by the respondent and the associates

having nexus with Mafia and Government

Machinery.








associates.


male or female member in his family and

is alone with ailing bedridden and on

home oxygen old age mother and has been

kept captive without any source of

income.






PRAYER



(a) Kindly accommodate for the early date of

hearing under urgent listing matter.




DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 22.04.2013.


C.M.NO. 6714 OF 2013


Court No.04


IN THE MATTER OF :


VERSUS


AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash Poddar, aged about 40 years,

S/o Late Sh. Deep Narayan Poddar, R/o RZF-893,

Netaji Subhas Marg, Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam

Colony, New Delhi-77, do hereby solemnly affirm

and declare as under:-

1. That I am the appellant in Person in the

above matter and well conversant with the

facts of the case and hence competent to

swear this affidavit.

2. That the accompanying application under

urgent listing matter for early date of

hearing of MATT APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2012 and

filled in “Form for urgent (Mentioning)

cases for Listing/Accommodation” in

duplicate are true and correct to the best

of my personal knowledge and belief.

Deponent

VERIFICATION:

Verified at New Delhi on this

22nd day of April,2013 that the contents of the

above affidavit from Para 01 to 02 are true and

correct to my knowledge and belief. Nothing

materials has been concealed therefrom.

Deponent




NOTICE OF MOTION To, Ms. Rina Kumari D/O Surendra Narayan Poddar Assistant Manager (RC) Marketing Division Indian Oil Corporation Barauni, Refinery, Begusarai, Bihar Madam, That the appellant filed the application for early hearing. The same is listed before this Hon’ble Court on 25/04/2013. The Copy of the same is enclosed.

DRAWN AND FILED BY

APPELLANT IN PERSON NEW DELHI DATED:23/04/2013

Track Result for:ED881673094IN Track More

Booked at Booked

On Delivered

at Delivered

on

DELHI HIGH COURT S.O

23/04/2013 Barauni Oil Refinery S.O

29/04/2013 Details

Detailed Track Events For ED881673094IN

Date Time Status at Status

23/04/2013 12:09:53 DELHI HIGH COURT S.O

Item Booked


Item bagged for NEW DELHI SH


Bag Despatched to NEW DELHI SH

23/04/2013 17:02:14 NEW DELHI SH

Bag Received

23/04/2013 18:53:45 NEW DELHI SH

Bag Opened

23/04/2013 18:53:46 NEW DELHI SH

Item Received

23/04/2013 21:11:31 NEW DELHI SH

Item bagged for BANGALORE SH

24/04/2013 00:23:18 NEW DELHI SH

Bag Despatched to PALAM TMO

24/04/2013 02:12:09 PALAM TMO Bag Received

24/04/2013 05:39:54 PALAM TMO Bag Despatched to BANGALORE SH

25/04/2013 00:27:41 BANGALORE SH

Bag Received

25/04/2013 10:11:02 BANGALORE SH

Bag Opened

25/04/2013 10:11:03 BANGALORE SH

Item Received

26/04/2013 01:52:28 BANGALORE Item bagged for

SH BARAUNI RMS

26/04/2013 02:32:07 BANGALORE SH

Bag Despatched to KOLKATA AIRPORT SH

26/04/2013 11:32:16 KOLKATA AIRPORT SH

Bag Received

26/04/2013 13:39:01 KOLKATA AIRPORT SH

Bag Despatched to MA HOWRAH RMS

27/04/2013 19:10:12 BARAUNI RMS Bag Received

27/04/2013 19:10:59 BARAUNI RMS Bag Opened

27/04/2013 19:11:00 BARAUNI RMS Item Received

28/04/2013 04:11:37 BARAUNI RMS Item bagged for Barauni Oil Refinery S.O

28/04/2013 04:47:43 BARAUNI RMS Bag Despatched to Barauni Oil Refinery S.O

29/04/2013 11:41:19 Barauni Oil Refinery S.O

Bag Received


Bag Opened


Item Received

29/04/2013 Barauni Oil Refinery S.O

Item Delivered [To: RINA KUMARI ]

Aadhaar card status| Worldnet Express | Tracking help | Corporate login |

SMS tracking | Home

http://services.ptcmysore.gov.in/Speednettracking/Track/UIDTrack.aspx

http://www.worldnetexpress.com/

http://www.indiapost.gov.in/Tracking.aspx

http://services.ptcmysore.gov.in/speednettracking/Corporate%20Customer/CCLogin.aspx

http://www.indiapost.gov.in/Tracking.aspx#sms

http://www.indiapost.gov.in/



IN THE MATTER OF:


VS.


INDEX

SN PARTICULARS PAGE

NO.

1 Urgent Application 1

2 Application for representation of

Mat. App. 7 of 2012 before the

Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Hon’ble

High Court of Delhi for early date

of hearing u/s 151 of CPC (as

amended up to date)

2-9

3 Affidavit in support of Application

for representation of Mat. App. 7 of

2012 before the Hon’ble Chief

Justice of the Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi for early date of hearing

10-

11

DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON :15.07.2013.

DIARY NO: 99864

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT

NEW DELHI

C.M. NO. OF 2013


IN THE MATTER OF:


VS.


URGENT APPLICATION

TO

DEPUTY REGISTRAR

HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

NEW DELHI

SIR,

Kindly treat the accompanying Applications as

urgent one in accordance with Delhi High Court

Rules.

The ground of urgency as prayed in the prayer

clause as mentioned in the Applications and the

prayer clause.

DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON :15.07.2013.


DELHI

C.M.NO. OF 2013

MAT. APP. NO. 7 OF 2012

IN THE MATTER OF :


VERSUS


APPLCATION FOR REPRESENTATION OF

MATT.APPL. 7 OF 2012 FOR EARLY DATE OF

HEARING BEFORE THE HON’BLE CHIEF

JUSTICE OF THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF

DELHI U/S 151 CPC (AS-AMENDED UP-TO-

DATE)

To

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of the

Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New

Delhi.





respectfully submits his representation

and seeking early hearing against the

impugned common order dated 16.12.2011

passed by the Family Court, Dwarka of

Delhi in HMA Case NO.678 of 2010.

2. That this representation is arising out

of the dismissal of the application C.M.

APPL. No.6714/2013 for early hearing of

appeal by the division bench of this

Hon’ble court on 29.04.2013.

3. That the petition for divorce is pending

over the last 4 years. The respondent

has indulged in delaying tactics to

protract the litigation. It has been

seen by as many as four learned judges

of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,

five learned judges of the Hon’ble High

Court and two learned judges of the

Trial court and yet the end is not in

sight.




imposed a decree of judicial separation



parte.

5. That the appellant had approached to the

Hon’ble High court for correction of

section. However, instead of correcting

the section Hon’ble High Court has

upheld the Judgment of the Trial Court

indirectly.


never ever appeared before the Hon’ble

High Court and the Trial Court except

once on 09.02.2011 at the Trail court

only. Notice has been served and service




7. That there is a total separation from

the respondent since 9 years is an

admitted fact by the respondent and by

the judgment of the Trial Court.

8. That the Trial Court below committed a

grave error in holding that the

appellant has failed to show even a

single incident of alleged cruelty

caused by the Respondent when in view

of the facts and circumstances of the

case and the evidence adduced clearly

shows the brutal, unacceptable and

unchanging acts and behaviors of the

Respondent and the threats and acts

amounting to mental and physical cruelty

against the appellant and his family

members which has made it impossible

for the appellant to live with the

Respondent.

9. That the dispute is an unusual in

nature.

10. That the petition is fulfilling two

grounds out of five grounds of divorce

available in India i.e. desertion and

cruelty.

11. That the marriage between the appellant

and the respondent has broken down

irretrievably. It is emotionally dead

for all purposes. Any attempt towards

restoration will escalate the tension

and endanger the life of the appellant

and his bedridden mother.

12. That the hatred amongst the appellant

and the respondent families have widely

engulfed over the last 10 years. There

is no room for compromise left.


appellant is at stake and is reeling

under criminal conspiracy since 10

years. Out of 10 years, 6 years from

2004 to 2009 was looming under Mafia

threat and saving the life of his

handicapped father. Another 4 years from

2010 to 2013 in litigations and saving

the life of his bedridden mother.10

years have passed by and the final

hearing is not yet over. The appellant

is now 40 plus year old and heading

towards cancer and multiple health

problems. He may not live more than 10

to 15 years under this facts and

circumstances of the case.

14. That the respondent and the associates

have issued Non Bail able Warrant (NBW)

without the knowledge of the appellant

while he was residing in Delhi through

SP, Begusarai, in frivolous litigation

in case No. 9p/2010 u/s 12 of Domestic

Violence Act 2005 against the appellant

and his ailing mother in Bihar in 2010

after a gap of 5 years and total

separation, just as a part of well-

designed criminal conspiracy to kidnap

and kill the appellant in the court

premises. The application for

cancellation of NBW and reply of the

complaint u/s 12 of D.V. Act 2005 has

been filed by the appellant in case No.

9p/2010 at Begusarai court of Bihar








associates.






income.




19. That the appellant is residing on rented

accommodation and is not in a position

to sustain his life in mega cities like

Delhi under these facts and


20. That the appellant will be forced to

leave the city under the economic

compulsion and under these facts and




PRAYER



(a) Kindly accommodate the matter for early

hearing to end the justice and allow the

appellant to live the rest of his life as

the best part of his productive life has

been consumed by the rancour and

litigations and yet the end is not in

sight




DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 15.07.2013.


C.M.NO. OF 2013


IN THE MATTER OF :


VERSUS


AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash Poddar, aged about 40 years,

S/o Late Sh. Deep Narayan Poddar, R/o RZF-893,

Netaji Subhas Marg, Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam

Colony, New Delhi-77, do hereby solemnly affirm

and declare as under:-

1. That I am the appellant in Person in the

above matter and well conversant with the

facts of the case and hence competent to

swear this affidavit.

2. That the accompanying application for

representation of Mat. App. 7 of 2012 before

the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Hon’ble

High Court of Delhi for early date of

hearing is true and correct to the best of

my personal knowledge and belief.

Deponent

VERIFICATION:

Verified at New Delhi on this

15th day of July, 2013 that the contents of the

above affidavit from Para 01 to 02 are true and

correct to my knowledge and belief. Nothing

materials has been concealed therefrom.

Deponent


DELHI

MAT. APP. NO. 7 OF 2012

COURT NO.06

REGULAR ON: 16.07.2013

ITEM NO:44

IN THE MATTER OF :


VERSUS


SUBMISSION OF BRIEF WRITTEN SYNOPSIS

ALONGWITH PHOTOCOPIES OF THE JUDGMENTS

RELIED UPON THEM

To

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of the

Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New

Delhi.





respectfully submits his brief written

submission/synopsis against the impugned

common order dated 16.12.2011 passed by

the Family Court, Dwarka of Delhi in HMA

Case NO.678 of 2010.

2. That the matter is ex parte without

written statement by the Respondent is

an admitted fact by the Judgment of the

Trial Court.

3. That the petition for divorce had been

instituted on 25.10.2010 and pending

since then. It has been seen by as many

as four learned judges of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India, five learned

judges of the Hon’ble High Court and two

learned judges of the Trial Court and

yet the end is not in sight.




imposed a decree of judicial separation



parte.

5. That the appellant had approached to the

Hon’ble High court for correction of

section.


never ever appeared before the Hon’ble

High Court and the Trial Court except

once on 09.02.2011 at the Trail court

only. Notice has been served and service




7. That there is a total separation from

the respondent since 15.04.2005 is an

admitted fact by the respondent and by

the judgment of the Trial Court.

8. That the Trial Court below committed a

grave error in holding that the

appellant has failed to show even a

single incident of alleged cruelty

caused by the Respondent when in view

of the facts and circumstances of the

case and the evidence adduced clearly

shows the brutal, unacceptable and

unchanging acts and behaviors of the

Respondent and the threats and acts

amounting to mental and physical cruelty

against the appellant and his family

members which has made it impossible

for the appellant to live with the

Respondent.

9. That the appellant had three member

families i.e. above the knee amputee old

age father, COPD, chronic asthmatic old

age mother and appellant himself

struggling with his career and ailing

parents in Mega cities like Delhi. Under

these facts and circumstances respondent

deserted the appellant and his ailing

father who was on death bed, urine and

stool were passing through catheter and

never came back either in Bihar or in

Delhi.


Appellant is being crushed to death

finally by the respondent and the

associates on 15.11.2007

11. That the respondent and the associates

have issued Non Bail able Warrant (NBW)

without the knowledge of the appellant

while he was residing in Delhi through

SP, Begusarai, in frivolous litigation

in case No. 9p/2010 u/s 12 of Domestic

Violence Act 2005 against the appellant

and his ailing mother in Bihar in 2010

after a gap of 5 years and total

separation, just as a part of well-

designed criminal conspiracy to kidnap

and kill the appellant in the court

premises. The application for

cancellation of NBW and reply of the

complaint u/s 12 of D.V. Act 2005 has

been filed by the appellant in case No.

9p/2010 at Begusarai court of Bihar


appellant is at stake and is reeling

under criminal conspiracy since 10

years. Out of 10 years, 6 years from

2004 to 2009 was looming under Mafia

threat and saving the life of his

handicapped father. Another 4 years from

2010 to 2013 in litigations and saving

the life of his bedridden mother.10

years have passed by and the final

hearing is not yet over. The appellant

is now 40 plus year old and heading

towards cancer and multiple health

problems. He may not live more than 10

to 15 years under this facts and











income.




16. That the appellant is residing on rented

accommodation in an unauthorized colony

of Delhi and is not in a position to

sustain his life in mega cities like

Delhi under these facts and


17. That the appellant will be forced to

leave the city under the economic

compulsion and under these facts and


18. That the dispute is an unusual in

nature.

19. That the petition is fulfilling two

grounds out of five grounds of divorce

available in India i.e. desertion and

cruelty.

20. That the marriage between the appellant

and the respondent has broken down

irretrievably. It is emotionally dead

for all purposes. Any attempt towards

restoration will escalate the tension

and endanger the life of the appellant

and his bedridden mother.

21. That the hatred amongst the appellant

and the respondent families have widely

engulfed over the last 10 years. There

is no room for compromise left.



PRAYER



(a) Kindly end the justice and allow the

appellant to live the rest of his life as

the best part of his productive life has

been consumed by the rancour and

litigations and yet the end is not in

sight




DRAWN & FILED BY:

APPELLANT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 16.07.2013.

DIARY NO : 101073

True Copy of MATT. APPL. NO. 7 of 2012 before HIGH COURT of DELHI

Law

Transcript of True Copy of MATT. APPL. NO. 7 of 2012 before HIGH COURT of DELHI