<p>A couple seeking divorce with mutual consent was denied the decree on the ground that the man failed to prove his identity as the woman’s husband.<br /><br />In the divorce petition, the man had identified himself as Titu alias Surinder, but insisted on a decree of divorce in the name of Surinder alone.<br /><br />The court dismissed their plea, saying the man has failed to prove that Titu and Surinder were the same person. “I am of the considered opinion that the husband is Titu Jassal, who attempted to mislead his identity as Surinder with a view to obtain a decree dissolving the marriage between the woman and Surinder,” said additional district judge Sujata Kohli.<br /><br />“The petitioners are held not entitled to decree of divorce under provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act,” said Kohli.<br /><br />The Delhi-based couple, in their petition, had claimed that they are married since 2004, and are seeking divorce due to temperamental differences in opinion, attitude, behaviour and standards of living.</p>.<p>They said they have been living separately since January 26, 2008. The court called for a police inquiry after it doubted the identity of the man. After going through the police report, the court said the man before them was Titu, residing at the given address, but not Surinder as being claimed by him in his plea.<br /><br />The court noted that the man could not give any document to police to prove that Titu Jassal and Surinder are the same person. It gave an option to the couple to remove the name ‘Surinder’ so that a decree could be passed to dissolve their marriage, but they did not agree to it. <br /></p>
<p>A couple seeking divorce with mutual consent was denied the decree on the ground that the man failed to prove his identity as the woman’s husband.<br /><br />In the divorce petition, the man had identified himself as Titu alias Surinder, but insisted on a decree of divorce in the name of Surinder alone.<br /><br />The court dismissed their plea, saying the man has failed to prove that Titu and Surinder were the same person. “I am of the considered opinion that the husband is Titu Jassal, who attempted to mislead his identity as Surinder with a view to obtain a decree dissolving the marriage between the woman and Surinder,” said additional district judge Sujata Kohli.<br /><br />“The petitioners are held not entitled to decree of divorce under provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act,” said Kohli.<br /><br />The Delhi-based couple, in their petition, had claimed that they are married since 2004, and are seeking divorce due to temperamental differences in opinion, attitude, behaviour and standards of living.</p>.<p>They said they have been living separately since January 26, 2008. The court called for a police inquiry after it doubted the identity of the man. After going through the police report, the court said the man before them was Titu, residing at the given address, but not Surinder as being claimed by him in his plea.<br /><br />The court noted that the man could not give any document to police to prove that Titu Jassal and Surinder are the same person. It gave an option to the couple to remove the name ‘Surinder’ so that a decree could be passed to dissolve their marriage, but they did not agree to it. <br /></p>