PRADEEP KUMAR JHA Vs. PRATIBHA JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present first appeal has been preferred against the judgement and decree dated 19.12.2015 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur in Divorce Petition No. 03 of 2012, Sri Pradeep Kumar Jha Vs. Smt. Pratibha Jha, by which the divorce petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the appellant filed a divorce petition before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur under section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The petitioner has stated that both the petitioner and respondent are Hindu. Their marriage was solemnized according to Hindu rites and rituals on 27.11.2009. In the marriage, the respondent was given gold and sliver jewellery and costly dresses worth Rs. 5 lacs which the respondent is still keeping with her. At the time of marriage, the petitioner was B-Tech Degree holder and working in Ahmadabad in ECN India Private Ltd Where he continued till 2009 and thereafter he shifted in IBB Soft India ltd. where he continued till April, 2010. The respondent is an MCA (Master Computer Application) and at the time of marriage she used to live in Gurgaon, Haryana with her brother-in-law Neeraj. After marriage, she lived with the petitioner in Ahmadabad for about 4-5 months. The respondent was very arrogant and aggressive by nature and was totally irresponsible towards her matrimonial obligations. The petitioner any how accommodated, but her approach remained indifferent. Despite prevented by him, she used to visit to her brother-in-law. In May, 2010, the petitioner was transferred to Pune in Assenture Company. His brother-in-law Neeraj also got himself transferred to Pune and started working in a company. Since then, the respondent became more arrogant and disobedient. She used to deprive him from co-habitation for many days causing him mental and physical harassment. She used to humiliate him before his friends and relatives by using abusive language and doing marpeet. Her parents ignored his complaints about her nature and behaviour. She and her brother-in-law Neeraj called him impotent and asked him to give divorce. The situation became such that the respondent might get him killed. She has no interest in him nor she is interested in discharging matrimonial obligation. Therefore, there is no option with the petitioner except to seek divorce.

(3.) The respondent filed a written statement admitting the marriage but denying all allegations made in the petition against her nature and character. She has stated that the petition has been filed on imaginary grounds. She is MCA degree holder and the petitioner is B.Tech degree holder. Both husband and wife are doing job in private company and living together in a flat in Pune. She was discharging matrimonial responsibility. Denying any jewellery given to her by in laws except given her own family members, She has stated that sufficient dowry was given in her marriage, but the petitioner and his family members were never satisfied and were regularly demanding from her father Rs.5 lacs. The father and elder brother of the petitioner have full influence over the petitioner and under their control he is levelling false and imaginary allegation of adultery. His family members are inclined to re-marry him after divorce. The respondent is wiling to live with petitioner and perform conjugal obligations. Her brother-in-law and sister are enough educated and they have good job in a private company, she also works in a private company and after nine hours of duty, there remains no spare time with her to go somewhere. She is matured woman and understands what is good or bad for her. The allegation of adulterous life with her brother-in-law Neeraj has been pleaded by the petitioner just to give a colour. On the contrary, the petitioner does not perform his matrimonial obligation in terms of protection, security and financial assistance. She and her brother-in-law have never called him to be impotent. On 31.1.2012, the petitioner changed the lock of the flat and asked her to give 5 lacs rupees, otherwise, he will continue humiliating and doing Marpeet with her. On 1.1.2012 she lodged a police report about it and on the interference of the local police, the lock of the flat was opened. Her behaviour has never been harsh and in order to give her mental tension and pain, the petitioner has made allegation on her character. She has no affairs or relation with her brother-in-law Neeraj. She is still ready to live and perform her conjugal obligations.