SHASHI PRABHA Vs. ASHOK DHAWAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (as amended) has been filed by Ms. Shashi Prabha against the impugned judgment dated 31.01.2002 in HMA No.481/01 of the then learned Additional District Judge, Delhi vide which in a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) and Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (as amended) filed by Mr. Ashok Dhawan i.e. the respondent to the present appeal as petitioner thereof, on the ground of alleged cruelty and desertion, though the petition seeking the grant of a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (as amended) was declined, nevertheless the petition filed by the husband i.e. the respondent herein against the appellant herein his wife on the ground of desertion under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (as amended) was allowed.

(2.) As the parties to the present appeal were married on 30.08.1982 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Ceremonies and lived together till 14.03.1995 as contended by the respondent and till 15.03.1995 as contended by the appellant herein, the parties to the present appeal have admittedly not lived together from 16.03.1995 in any event till date. There is no child born out of the wedlock between the parties. Though, it was contended through averments made in the petition HMA No.481/2001 by the respondent that a newly born male child was taken in adoption in the month of February, 1994 on the instance of the appellant herein, the said child was allegedly not cared for by the appellant who persisted in her cruelties both with the respondenthusband as well as on the minor child and ultimately left the matrimonial home deserting the respondent spouse on 14.03.1995 when she took away all her articles of jewellery and clothes with her.

(3.) The alleged factum of adoption of the minor child and cruelty to the minor child has not been accepted by the learned Trial Court with it having been held that in the absence of the name of the putative parents of the minor child, taking into account the factum that there was no adoption deed executed and also the factum that there was no voluntary consent of the wife i.e. the appellant herein, the adoption of the minor child as contended by the husband i.e. the respondent to the present appeal and the petitioner of the HMA petition seeking divorce was not valid. The impugned verdict also observed to the effect that the respondent herein i.e. the petitioner of the HMA petition thereof seeking grant of divorce had not been able to prove that his wife has treated him with cruelty. No cross appeal was filed by the respondent to the present appeal i.e. the petitioner of the HMA petition no.481/01 which had been initially instituted on 14.01.2000 and thus as observed hereinabove, the allegations of cruelty meted out by the appellant to the respondent have not been established.