SHILPA RANI Vs. SURESH H. R.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 28(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, has been filed against the judgment and decree dtd. 20/4/2016 passed in M.C.No.3/2010 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Channagiri, by which the petition filed by the respondent/husband seeking dissolution of marriage, was allowed.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to filing of this appeal are that the appellant/wife and respondent/husband got married on 13/11/2005 as per the Hindu customs and rituals. The respondent/husband has averred that he is from a respectable family and his father is a government servant. It is further averred that the appellant/wife was happily residing in the matrimonial home initially after the marriage and out of the wedlock a male child has been born. It is further averred that the appellant/wife was not discharging her marital obligations properly, she used to quarrel with the respondent/husband and she had not shown any interest in cooking. It is further averred that mother of the respondent/husband is suffering from skin disease, hence the appellant/wife used to disrespect her and did not allow her to touch household articles. It is further averred that the appellant/wife used to pick up quarrel with the mother in law for silly reasons and as per the wish of the appellant/wife the respondent/husband had arranged separate house hoping that situation would improve. However, the appellant/wife has not changed her attitude. It is averred that appellant/wife threatened the respondent/husband and his family members and later went to her parental house without informing the appellant/wife, but later she came back. The act of the appellant/wife caused mental agony to the respondent/husband. It is further averred that appellant/wife is suffering from psychological problems, hence she was treated by the Psychiatrist and the Doctor has opined that the brain of the appellant/wife is not matured and was provided treatment. The appellant/wife refused to follow the Doctor's advise, by not taking the tablets. It is further averred that during second week of February 2009 the appellant/wife left the matrimonial home and started living with her parents and she refused to rejoin the matrimonial home. It is further averred that respondent/husband sent a letter to the appellant/wife and her father on 15/4/2009 and got issued legal notice dtd. 25/5/2009 to the appellant/wife, however, there was no reply from the appellant/wife. It is further averred that appellant/wife was harassing the respondent/husband, thus the acts of the appellant/wife amounts to cruelty.

(3.) The appellant/wife has entered appearance before the Family Court and filed the statement of objections. The appellant/wife has admitted the relationship and the birth of the child out of the wedlock. The appellant/wife has specifically denied the allegation of cruelty and averred that parents of the appellant/wife have given gold ornaments to the respondent/husband. It is further averred that it is the respondent/husband and his family members, who have behaved rudely with the appellant/wife. It is further averred that immediately after the birth of the child, the respondent/husband's family members used to get the household work done by the appellant/wife and did not provide her with sufficient food. Hence, she was not able to feed the new born baby. It is further averred that respondent/husband and his family members have harassed in order to forcefully send out the appellant/wife from matrimonial home.