SURESH HARI SHROTRIYA Vs. SUNITA SURESH SHROTRIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Extra Assistant Judge, Thane in Civil Appeal No.174 of 1982 on 31-7-1984, reversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial court on 22-4-82. The dispute in the second appeal is a matrimonial dispute between the parties. The Appellant Shri Suresh Hari Shrotriya is husband and Mrs.Sunita Suresh Shrotriya is the wife. The parties married at Kalyan on 30-4-1977 as per Hindu vedic rites. They do not have any issue. Both husband and wife are serving. At the time of marriage, the wife was serving as a clerk in rationing office at Ulhasnagar. It appears that the wife was divorce prior to the present marriage between the parties. The grievance of the husband is that after the marriage for the first time in the year 1978 she accompanied the husband reluctantly at his native place for religious function. Though the husband and wife both have taken leave for one month but during the period of 8 days, wife started requesting the husband to return to Bombay, and, ultimately both of them came to Bombay without spending month at his native place. The grievance of the husband also is that in the month of March-78 wife told the maternal uncle of the husband that it was impossible for her to fulfil the matrimonial obligations with the husband and his maternal uncle gave her advice and thereafter the wife apologised. According to the husband the wife in front of his father told him that he had come to spoil their marital life and that he should not reside with them and accordingly husband's father left his place. It is further case of the husband that the wife was not worthy housewife and she was not at all attending to and looking after him and she used to get up very late.In the month of December-78 husband was required to go to his native place for religious function and husband asked her to accompany him but the wife flatly refused and told him that she was not his servant and she would not behave according to his liking and wish and thereafter the wife physically assaulted him and she abused him in very filthy language. The husband thereafter had to go alone to his native place to perform religious ceremony. On 2-2-79 the husband asked the wife to go to his uncle Mr.Kulkarni but instead she went to Kalyan at her parents place on next day. On 3-2-79 the wife and the brother came to the appellant-husband and told him that the wife should be sent to parents place at Kalyan as she was ill. On that day the wife took away all her belongings and left the matrimonial home once for all. According to husband the behaviour of the wife caused mental cruelty to him and all his hopes were shattered by the wife's behaviour. In the petition filed by the husband seeking dissolution and divorce of marriage under Section-13(1) (a), of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in addition to the aforesaid averments relating to mental cruelty, case for desertion was also sought to be pleaded but since the learned counsel for the appellant does not press the ground desertion, the facts relating there to are not relevant for the purposes of present second appeal. The petition filed by the husband was contested by the wife and she denied the allegations made in the petition. The husband examined himself and also his brother-in-law Shri.Krishna Shivram Tungar, and maternal uncle Mr.Kulkarni. The wife also examined herself.

(2.) THE trial Court after recording evidence and hearing the learned counsel for the parties reached the conclusion that husband has proved that behavior of the wife had caused mental cruelty to him. The trial Court also concluded that husband had proved that wife deserted him on

(3.) MR .Vaidya, learned counsel for the appellant took me through the judgment passed by the appellate court as well as the trial court to demonstrate that the appellate court was not justified in disagreeing with the findings recorded by the trial court. I have also perused the relevant evidence relating to the issue of mental cruelty.