URMILA DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. RAVI PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the wife is directed against the judgment and decree dated Jan. 29, 1983 whereby the petition of the husband-respondent under section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act was allowed and the marriage between the parties, was dissolved by a decree of divorce.

(2.) The respondent-husband filed a petition for a decree of divorce. It is alleged in the petition that the marriage between the parties was solemnized at Meerut on 18-11-71 according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies. The appellant gave birth to two children from the wedlock at Meerut namely Neelam on 11-10-1972 and Neeraj on 15-11-1978. The female child is in the custody of the respondent and male child is in the custody of the appellant. After the marriage, the appellant came to the get house of the respondent at Meerut where the parties started residing to her as husband and wife. The respondent was employed at Delhi and was daily travelling by train to attend his duties. After the marriage, the appellant told the respondent that her marriage with him was solemnized against her wishes and she did not want to marry him. She further started that she was interested in marrying one Malu Mal Jain with whom she had a love affair. This naturally caused pain and agony in the mind of the respondent. It is further alleged that during the period when the parties were staying together at Meerut, the treatment of the appellant towards the respondent was very bad. She used to quarrel with him and abuse him many times and used to leave the matrimonial home without his permission and on being asked she used to pounce upon the respondent and quarrel with him. The respondent kept on tolerating this attitude of the appellant in order to maintain the matrimonial relations. It is further alleged that on the festival of Sakat in Jan. 1981, the appellant told the respondent that the male child Neeraj was her love sign with somebody else, which also caused mental pain and agony in the mind of the respondent. It is alleged that there were two murders in the family of the appellant and for that respondent advised her not to visit her parental family because of her safety but the appellant did not care for that advise also. From 1981 the parties have been residing together in the house of the respondent's sister and they resided there upto 12-3-198l at that place. During this period, the appellant threatened the respondent on of around 15-2-1981 in the presence of his brother-in-law that because the respondent had told the matter about her love sign of male child with somebody to his sister and brother-in-law she would forcibly take the two children and get them killed by rail and would also herself do so which also caused great mental pain and agony. It is further alleged that after the appellant left the matrimonial home she got a notice served on the respondent dated 7-9-1981 wherein she had made false allegations against the respondent and his character by saying that he was a drunkard, gambler and characterless. This allegation also caused mental pain and agony in his mind which amounts to cruelty. The respondent is still suffering from mental pain and agony because of the allegations. It is further alleged that the appellant has never bothered to take care of the female child nor she ever tried to meet her and she has ruined the life of the respondent and the minor children.

(3.) The petition was contested by the appellant. In the written statement she denied the allegation of cruelty but in paragraph 6 of the written statement, it is pleaded:-