LAWS(DLH)-2016-12-177

HARJIT KAUR Vs. SURINDER SINGH

Decided On December 22, 2016
HARJIT KAUR Appellant
V/S
SURINDER SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sometimes it become necessary to enquire from what motive a behaviour ensues. If the cause for the behaviour of a spouse is the result of breach of faith by the other spouse, and especially where the trust of fidelity is breached, it becomes the duty of the court to be more vigilant and appraise the evidence led at the trial with a hawk's eye. Sieving the evidence and then examining it under a microscope.

(2.) The appeal has reached for hearing today and none appears for the respondent. The reason is obvious. During the subsistence of the marriage he had an extra-marital relationship with one Ms.IK (name withheld). As a result of an illegal order passed by the learned Judge Family Court, the appellant was denied the opportunity to bring on record evidence of adultery. But as recorded in the order, dated January 18, 2016 passed in the appeal, the respondent admitted that he had formally married Ms. IK after decree for divorce in his favour was passed and that on February 05, 2008, i.e., when the marriage was subsisting he had fathered a child Master MS (name withheld). It would be relevant to note that the petition seeking annulment of the marriage by grant of a decree for divorce was filed by the respondent on July 12, 2004 and was allowed in his favour vide order, dated May 23, 2015. It is apparent that Master MS was born to Ms. IK when the proceedings for divorce were pending.

(3.) This appeal challenges the grant of decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(i)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act by the Family Court, 1955 Central District, Tis Hazari vide judgment and decree, dated May 23, 2015. The parties were married on July 03, 1993 at Ludhiana, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies and a child Ms. Harpreet was born to them. The respondent in his petition for divorce alleged the behavior of the appellant to be cruel; quarrelsome; that she consumed sleeping pills on the first night; demanded share in his ancestral property. The appellant was brought to Delhi by the respondent to reside in a rented house at Fateh Nagar, Delhi and here also she misbehaved with his sisters in September, 1996 and in August, 1998 i.e. on the day of Raksha Bandhan.