Court junks suit filed by a man for recovery of money siphoned off by ex-wife

Mumbai: The Bombay City Civil court recently dismissed a suit filed by a Borivali resident for recovery of money that his ex-wife allegedly siphoned off from their family business to buy a house, car and other things for his business associate with whom she allegedly had extramarital relations

Mumbai: The Bombay City Civil court recently dismissed a suit filed by a Borivali resident for recovery of money that his ex-wife allegedly siphoned off from their family business to buy a house, car and other things for his business associate with whom she allegedly had extramarital relations.

He claimed that after the marriage, his wife was entrusted with the responsibility to look after the accounts of the firm and since she was looking after the banking transactions, she was formally made the proprietor of the firm in November 1989 (HT File)

The court held that the husband failed to prove the claim that his former wife, who divorced him on the ground of impotency, had extramarital affair with his business associate and the woman indeed misappropriated funds from their family firm.

The husband, a Borivali resident, had filed the suit only against his business associate, a Malad west resident and a chartered accountant by profession, for inquiry into the financial benefits earned by him from the amount transferred to him by his ex-wife and for recovery of ₹35.23 lakh with 21% interest which he claimed were transferred by his wife to the business associate from their family business.

The husband, an engineer by qualification, said he married the woman on August 5, 1989. Prior to marriage, their family was into manufacturing metal parts. He claimed that after the marriage, his wife was entrusted with the responsibility to look after the accounts of the firm and since she was looking after the banking transactions, she was formally made the proprietor of the firm in November 1989.

The husband claimed that after taking money, his ex-wife walked out of the house in 1997 and filed a divorce petition in February 1999. The marriage between the two was dissolved in January 2000. The husband filed the suit in September 2000.

The Malad resident filed an objection to the suit denying his relationship with the woman. He primarily objected to the fact that the suit cannot proceed any further, as the husband had not made his ex-wife a party to it. He also claimed that his forefathers had an estate in Malad and he himself and the forefathers are rich enough therefore there was no question of him requiring to do all this to acquire a flat. In fact, the business associate claimed, that the husband’s family had taken a loan of ₹8 lakh from him.

The woman too objected to her ex-husband’s claims and in the reply said that she walked out of their marriage because he was impotent. She claimed that out of the settlement in the divorce case, her husband had paid her ₹10 lakh as permanent alimony. She further claimed that after divorcing him, she remarried in 2001 and has two children from her second husband.

She claimed that her ex-husband and his business associates were hands in glove and the suit was filed only to harass her after her second marriage.

She added that in 2007 the Malad resident had approached her and asked her to use a flat (which was allegedly bought using the money she had siphoned from her ex-husband’s family firm) for personal use, as he was unable to pay the maintenance charges of the suit flat.

Hence, she said, she started paying the maintenance charges and reside in the flat. Also, an agreement with that effect was executed under which she paid ₹15 lakh to him. She further claimed that her ex-husband knew about this.

The court, however, did not accept her claim that the suit was filed to harass her and that it was a collusive suit filed by her ex-husband in connivance with his business associate.