Duty of litigant to place all relevant material before trial court

Litigation cannot be permitted to be reduced to a gamble from
one court or another in the sanguine belief that if things go
wrong there is always an appellate forum available to drag
the litigation. A litigant has a basic duty to place all
necessary information before the Court and assist the Court
in arriving at the truth. If a litigant deliberately without any
justification or explanation refuses to assist the Court
properly, he cannot complain in appeal that he has been
denied justice.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.157 of 2012

1. Nand Lal Chaudhary 
Versus
1. Parmila Devi 
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN
SHARMA
Order dated;19-06-2014


Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

I.A. No. 1639/12 has been filed to condone delay of
about 7 days in filing the appeal.
The
present
appeal
arises
from
order
dated
16.1.2012 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court at
Buxar
in
Maintenance
Case
No.55M/08
filed
by
the
respondent for grant of maintenance. The learned Principal
Judge has granted maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month after
hearing the parties and considering the evidence placed
before him.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he
does not have the capacity to pay the amount as awarded.
His income has not been considered properly. He has not

married any other woman muchless had any child from such
second marriage. If the respondent was not willing to go back
to the matrimonial home to reside with him, she is not
entitled to any maintenance.
The order under appeal notices that the appellant
appeared but did not file any show cause. If the respondent
put forth evidence with regard to the income of the appellant,
it was for him to counter the same by leading proper evidence
in rebuttal. He did not do so, muchless filed any reply even.
In the Memo of Appeal, there is no explanation given why he
did not file any reply or lead cogent evidence.
We are not persuaded to accept the submission of
the appellant that he shall supplement the same in appeal.
Litigation cannot be permitted to be reduced to a gamble from
one court or another in the sanguine belief that if things go
wrong there is always an appellate forum available to drag
the litigation. A litigant has a basic duty to place all
necessary information before the Court and assist the Court
in arriving at the truth. If a litigant deliberately without any
justification or explanation refuses to assist the Court
properly, he cannot complain in appeal that he has been
denied justice.
If that were not enough, the Principal Judge arrived
at a conclusive finding from exhibits-1 and 2 filed on behalf
of the respondent that the appellant had married one

Kanchan Devi and had a baby from her also. It is significant
to notice that it is not a wild allegation made by the
respondent that the appellant has remarried. It is fortified by
mentioning a name also. The entire pleading in the Memo of
Appeal,
considering
that
no
reply
was
filed
to
the
maintenance claim, also does not contain any statement that
the appellant does not know any Kanchan Devi.
Learned counsel for the appellant very strenuously
sought to persuade us from the order under appeal that his
defence with regard to his income as deposed by the Mukhiya
has not been considered properly and there is no conclusive
evidence with regard to the same.
Yet again we find that
there is no denial of Exhibit-3, the Khatiyan entry in context
of the lands in possession of the appellant and his father.
In conclusion, we are not satisfied that the present
is a fit case warranting interference.
The delay is condoned. The appeal is dismissed.
(Navin Sinha, J)
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J)

Print Page