(1.) This appeal under Sec. 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the judgment dated 25.07.2015 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Courts, Karkardooma Court, whereby a husband's (respondent herein) petition for divorce under Sec. 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), was allowed and the marriage between the parties was dissolved.
(2.) The facts relevant to decide the case are that the marriage of the parties was solemnized on 08.05.2007 at Delhi. The wife (appellant herein) claims that her parents spent Rs.3,00,000.00 towards marriage expenses and that the dowry articles demanded by the husband were also given. The husband, however denies having demanded any dowry and also maintains that the marriage was a simple affair, held in a Dharamshala, namely, Shiv Mandir Dharamshala. The marriage was duly consummated, though no issue was born out of the wedlock. It is not disputed that on 09.05.2007, the newlyweds started residing in the husband's brother's home. Owing to continuous disagreements, however, the parties shifted to a rented accommodation. The husband has a speaking disability and apparently stutters. He alleged-in the divorce proceeding-that the appellant used to constantly ridicule him for his speaking disability, even in the presence of outsiders and outside the privacy of their home.
(3.) Police complaints were filed by the husband before Farsh Bazar, and Seelampur, Police Stations on 30.06.2007 and on 31.08.2007 respectively in which he alleged that the appellant had been threatening to commit suicide. The husband alleged that on account of the appellant's quarrelsome nature, his family was constrained to disown him and his wife and they even issued a public notice in the Dainik Jagran Daily on 31.08.2007.It was stated that when the parties lived together in the rented accommodation, the relationship was acrimonious due to the wife's conduct. The acrimony was to such extent that it caused annoyance to the neighbours, disturbing the peace in the area to such an extent that the parties were forced to change their residence several times. The husband also alleged that the appellant on 20.09.2007 had left for her parental home and thereafter came back after 2-3 days without the Stridhan articles or jewellery. The relationship between the parties further deteriorated and finally, on 05.09.2008, the appellant left the matrimonial home never to return.