Divorce Act, 1869

Divorce Act, 1869

Section-10

It is
found from the record that in spite of service of summons the respondent has
not entered appearance and contested the suit. The petitioner on the other hand
has proved her case for dissolution of her marriage with the respondent on the
ground of adultery coupled with cruelty. It is also found that no collusion or
connivance exists between the petitioner and the respondent with regard to the
subject matter of the suit namely, the dissolution of their marriage. Moreover,
since the respondent after being served with the summons has not contested the
suit, the averments of the petitioner have been proved by the evidence on
record. Since the two minor children are in custody of the petitioner and
living with her ever since she left the matrimonial home, I consider it to be
in the best interest of the children that they should continue to remain in the
custody of the petitioner unless the respondent can show any valid reason why
they should not continue to remain in the custody of the
petitioner-petitioner’s case proved. Decree Nisi be issued.

Ms. Christine Charmine Cholet Vs. Darryl
Thomas Cholet 8 BLT (HCD)-337.