JOGINDER KUMAR MIDHA Vs. USHA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the husband in directed against the judgment did decree dt. 29the September, 1982, passed by the Addl. Distt. Judge, Delhi wherdby his petition under Sec. 13 (i) (ia) and (ib) of the Hindu, Marriage Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') for dissolution of marriage was dismissed.

(2.) In the petition under section. 13 of the Act, it was alleged that the parties were married on 7th February 1973 at Faridabad and they resided together at Delhi till 30 th June, 1975. The marriage of the parties was solemnized according to traditional Hindu rites. On 30th June, 1975 the respondent in the absence of the appellant and without his consent left the matrimonial home at Delhi and went away to faridabad to permanently live with her parents. The appellant persistently tried to prevail upon the respondent to resume cohabitation. He also tried through the good offices of ear relatives of both sides but he failed to persuade her. The respondent is B.A., B.ed. and is employed as a teacher in Government school in sohan (Haryana) drawing a salary of Rs. 850/-. per month. The appellant promised to secure her suitable employment in Delhi itself so that she could live with the appellant. A son was born from the wedlock on 12th January, 1974 who is in tle custody of the appellant since his birth. A second son was born but he died within nine days of his birth due to the negligence. The fact of birth and death of this second child was kept concealed from the appellant. Neither the respondnor any of her relatives ever tried to bring about reconciliation since the time she left the matrimonial home. As against that the appellant and his relations approached the respondent several times but there was no response from the respondent. It is further alleged that on 20th December, 1977 the appellant alongwith his sister and brother-in-law went to the school of the respondent at Sohna. She refused to listen to the appellant and instead gave note in her own handwriting to the following effect :

(3.) The petition was contested by the respondent. In her written statement she raised certain preliminary objections. In this appeal. I am not concerned with the preliminary objections since the said objections were decided by separate order in favour of the appellant and were not pressed before me in this appeal. On merits, the respondent admitted the factum of marriage and the birth of the children. She, however denied the allegations of cruelty and desertion levelled against her. She denies that she left the appellant in his absence and without his consent. According to her, the fact of the matter is that the respondent was forcibly turned out of the house is three clothes on 29the June, 1975 and was forced to go to her parent's house by the appellant and his family members in the presence of neighbours and their relatives. The appellant wanted to marry a working girl who should be in a position to support and supplement the income of the family. At the time of the marriage, the respondent was employed, in Haryana. Since the school where the respondent was employed was far away from the house of the appellants, it was desired by the appellant that she should stay at her parent's house till a suitable accommodation was arranged. The appellant used to come to Faridabad in the first week of each month to collect the salary from the respondent. The entire salary used to be taken by him and not even a single paise used to be to left in the hands of the respondent even for her pocket expenses. It is alleged that on one occasion the respondent brought an ordinary saree out of her salary which annoyed the appellant and the respondent was rebuked and abused for the same. The appellant taunted that already muchless had been given in dowry. Cannot your brothers buy you new clothes". The job of the respondent was temporary which was terminated in 1984. Thereafter the respondent started living with the appellant in the matrimonial home. The appellant did not like the respondent to be out of job and started nagging, coaxing and raising false accusations against the respondent. She was even asked to bring money from her parent's house in order ot support and mnintain herself. The respondent, however, could not acceed to the unjust requests of the appellant as her father was a retired Government servant and was getting a meagre pension. The respondent did not want to burden her brothers for expenses as they had already spent enough on her marriage. The appellant and his family member could not be prevailed and persuaded and they continued to torture, maltreat and abuse the respondent. This made the life of the respondent dange on hell and she was made to feel worse than a maid servant. She was directed to leave the matrimonial home and not to come back unless she brings Rs. 500/-. She could only bring Rs.200/- from her brother and went back to the matrimonial home. The appellant on seeing that she did not bring Rs. 500/- became more cruel and abnormal. The respondent kept on trying frantically to get the employment but she did not succeeded. The appellant was also helping to get her employment and was going with her for certain interviews but the respondent was unable to get any employment. It is further pleaded that the appellant and his family members used to hurlabuses and insults and ugly remakrs on the respondent. Some ugly remarks hurled by the family of the appellant have been reproduced in the written statement. It is further stated in the written statement that in spite of abuses etc. The respondent kept on staying in the matrimonial home with the hope that better senses would prevail on the appellant and his family members. It is alleged that on Sunday in June, 1975 Mr. Raldev Kumar, the brother of the respondent, visited 28, Krishna Nagar, New Delhi to inquire about the health and welfare of the family. He was directed by B.L. Midha, the elder brother of the appellant and his brother-in-law Jagdish Mitter to bring K.K. verma, the eldest brother off the respondent to their house to settle the matters. B.L. Midha stated that a rotten person like the respondent cannot stay in their family nor can be adjusted by them. As a consequence, the eldest brother of the respondent namely K.K. Verma came to their house on 29the June, 1975. At the time, the appellant, B.L. Midha, their two younger sisters, their mother and two sons of Santosh assembled in the room along with the respondent and her son. B.K. Midha was the chief spokesman for the family of the appellant and he asked the brother of the respondent away and hurled abuses and false accusations on him as well as on the respondent. Not only this, the family members of the appellant slapped and pushed K.K. Verma by using filthy language. The appellant them pushed out the respondent from the matrimonial home along with her elder brother and the door was closed from inside. The respondent's infant son was snatched away from the respondent and the respondent was turned out in three clothes and all he jewellery, clothes other valuables were illegally kept back. At that time the respondent was in the family way and the appellant and his family members had full knowledge of the same. In spite of that she was treated shabily and turned out of the house. In spite of this abnormal attitude of the appellant and his family members, the respondent and her relatives made several attempts for reconciliation. The appellant and his family members were, however, determined to put an end to the marriage and refused to take back the respondent.