VIJAY Vs. USHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition impugns an order dated 15.1.2011 whereby the petitioners petition under Section 13(1)(i -a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ,,HM Act), seeking a decree of divorce was dismissed. The petitioners case was that his marriage with the respondent was solemnised on 23.11.1999 at Palam, New Delhi. The parties lived together for some time and a child was born from the wedlock; that from the very beginning the respondent/wife, refused to stay in the matrimonial home and treated him with cruelty on numerous instances making his life and that of his parents miserable. The grounds of cruelty raised by him were that she would state that she was forced to marry him against her wishes; that she never liked the petitioner; that she would constantly impress upon him to divorce her; that she was uncooperative and indeed had an extra -marital relationship and her character was always questionable; that because of her persistent uncooperative attitude, he suffered extreme mental tension, leading to deterioration in their relationship. However, he continued to bear it all because of his mothers advise that with the passage of time things would settle down since these were signs of her immaturity. But, he alleges, his wifes acts of cruelty continued including the occasion when she refused to cook any food for the petitioner and his family members; that she quarrelled with his mother for vegetables and indeed abused and shouted at her and threatened his parents with dire consequences; that she would shut the door of her room and on one occasion she cut her hand with a blade and had to be rushed to a doctor for immediate medical help; that she deprived him of physical relations which constituted the worst kind of cruelty and continued to insult him in the most foul language in front of his parents and relatives. Therefore, in order to maintain certain peace and harmony and to save his matrimonial home, he shifted out of his parents house to another house on rent. Even then his wifes attitude did not change. Indeed it became worse. The petitioner/husband contended that he was a Government servant and had been allotted a Government accommodation where the petitioner and his wife were living but due to his wifes cruel attitude he had to shift out of that place and live elsewhere. However, later he shifted to another Government accommodation in Timarpur. He submitted that on occasions his wife would beat him up and make him a laughing stock before his friends and on occasions she would threaten the petitioner and his family of committing suicide and have them put behind bars. The petitioner contended that on various specific dates, the wife had treated him with cruelty, in particular:

(2.) THE respondent -wife, however, refuted each of the arguments and denied the allegations as being untrue, concocted and fabricated.

(3.) THE Trial Court after considering the pleadings of the parties framed the following issues: