NEHA Vs. SUNIL CHANDANANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dtd. 22/12/2021 passed by the 1st Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur in HMA No.480/2017 whereby the suit filed by the appellant/wife for grant of decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty under Sec. 13 (v) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was dismissed. The appellant/wife is in Appeal before this Court.

(2.) The parties got married on 22/11/2012 as per Hindu custom and the parties have no issues out of their relations. The appellant/wife filed a petition under Sec. 13 (1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the ground of cruelty, inter alia, stating that after the marriage, while her stay at her in-laws' house, her mother-in-law committed cruelty with her and her mother-in-law used to mentally harass her. Her mother-in-law neither allowed her to enter the kitchen nor allowed her to prepare the food. Her mother-in-law was not allowing to eat the food. After staying at her matrimonial home for about 2 months, the appellant started residing in a rented accommodation. Oftenly the respondent used to come late to the house and the respondent used to take liquor and also used to smoke. On objection raised by the appellant, the respondent used to commit Marpeet with her. The parents of the appellant got opened one Medical Store at Raipur for the respondent by spending Rs.2.003 lakhs. The respondent allured the appellant and took her to Champa and kept her in a rented accommodation. The respondent started running the Medical Store at Raipur. The respondent started wasting his money in liquor, gambling etc. The appellant started working in a Private School at Champa and thereby she was managing the rent of her private accommodation. After some days, the Medical Store was closed and the respondent became unemployed. The respondent started harassing the appellant because of which in the month of May, 2016, the appellant returned to her parental house at Raipur. The respondent with a malafide intention started threatening the appellant on mobile and also used to send SMSs. The appellant does not want to reside with the respondent. Thus the suit was filed.

(3.) Written statement has been filed by the respondent/husband denying the plaint averments. The respondent has stated that the marriage was solemnized in the year 2011 and it was love marriage. The appellant was already married, as she had already performed love marriage in the year 2011 and thereafter in the year 2012 the appellant performed love marriage with the respondent. The appellant is an unconventional lady and she wants to lead an independent life. However, the respondent wants to live with the appellant. The respondent had opened a Medical Store at Raipur after borrowing money from some people. At that time, the appellant was working as Teacher in a Private School at Champa. As monthly rent of the Medical Store was on higher side and the respondent also suffered some loss, he had to close the medical store and return the amount to the people from whom he had borrowed. The respondent ultimately returned to Champa. The appellant was not willing to reside with the family members of the respondent. The respondent is the only son of his parents. During his stay with the appellant, when the respondent used to give money to his parents and his handicapped sister, the appellant used to raise quarrel with him. The respondent has further stated that he loves the appellant very much and he wants to reside with the appellant.