GURBACHAN KAUR Vs. SARDAR SWARAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendant' s second appeal arising out of the judgment and decree dated 13th October, 1976 passed by the Additional District Judge, Dehra Dun.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal can briefly be stated as under : Smt. Gurbachan Kaur and Sardar Swaran Singh, hereinafter called the appellant and the respondent respectively, were married on 2nd of October, 1973. Some differences having arisen between them, the respondent filed a suit under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act for a declaration that his marriage with the appellant was null and void. It was alleged in the plaint that on 14th of October, 1973, when the appellant was found profusely bleeding from her private part, she was shown to a lady doctor and it was then discovered that the appellant was already having pregnancy with a treat of miscarriage. On being questioned the appellant confessed that she was quick with child and had taken medicine to get rid of the pregancy. THE respondent, it is alleged, therefore sent the appellant back to her father' s house, but on 25th of March, 1974, the appellant was escorted back to his house by her mother and left there. It is further alleged that when the respondent insisted upon the appellant to go back to her father' s house, as she had illicit intercourse with some person before her marriage, the appellant went to bath-room and swallowed Tik-20 saying that she was ending her life. She was again taken to hospital from where she was discharged on 28th of March, 1974 and was then sent back to her father' s house along with her Istridhan property.

(3.) AGGRIEVED against the judgment of the trial court, Smt. Gurbachan Kaur filed an appeal in the court of the District Judge, Dehra Dun. The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, who heard the appeal, took notice of the amendment of S. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act as brought about by Act 68 of 1976 and observed that, after the amendment, cruelty simpliciter was a sufficient ground for divorce and it was not necessary that such an act should be repeated or persistent. Further on the learned Additional District Judge concurred with the finding of the trial court that the allegation made by the appellant against the respondent about his having adulterous relations with his sister-in-law and about the respondent and his sister-in-law having colluded to administer poison to her amounted to acts of cruelty. The learned Additional District Judge, accordingly, confirmed the decree passed by the trial court and dismissed the appeal.