JITENDER KUMAR PAHWA Vs. USHA KIRAN PAHWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT -husband is aggrieved by impugned judgment of 4th April, 2002 vide which appellant's petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion has been dismissed. The factual background of this case already stands noted in impugned judgment and needs no reiteration.

(2.) SUFFICE it would be to note that the parties were married on 8th October, 1990 and as per appellant, respondent -wife had deserted him in July, 1992. The appellant's petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights filed in July, 1992 was withdrawn in December, 1995 as the efforts for reconciliation of matrimonial dispute between the parties had failed. Apart from deposition of appellant there is evidence of his neighbour -Mr. V.K.Tyagi (PW -2) and his office colleague Mr. Shyam Sunder (PW -3) . Whereas respondent has herself deposed as RW -1 and got examined an official from Delhi Vidyut Board to prove that payment of electricity bill (Ex.RW -1/1) was made by her through cheque on 27th December, 1995. Apart from this respondent has got examined an official viz. Mr. Ram Dayal (RW -3) from MTNL to prove that a landline connection in Mayur Vihar house was in use during the period already in question. Mr. Minocha (RW -4) is a neighbour of respondent, who has been got examined to corroborate the version of respondent.

(3.) AT the hearing, it was contended by learned counsel for appellant that respondent was residing in Mayur Vihar house but appellant alongwith respondent had shifted to a rented house in GTB Enclave in July, 1992. It was submitted that respondent stayed there for 10 -15 days and thereafter had gone to her parental house and since July, 1992 she has been living separately. It was pointed out by learned counsel for appellant that deposition of appellant is fully corroborated from the evidence of his colleague Mr. Shyam Sunder (PW -3) and the factum of desertion stands fully established from the evidence on record. To belie the stand of respondent of her living at Mayur Vihar house from the date of marriage till the year 2007, learned counsel for appellant has drawn attention of this Court to electricity bills [Mark X -1 to X -14] to point out that there was no consumption of electricity which falsifies the stand of respondent of living at Mayur Vihar house. Thus, it was submitted on behalf of appellant that findings in the impugned judgment stand contradicted from the evidence on record and so impugned judgment deserves to be set aside and petitioner's petition on the ground of desertion ought to be allowed.