AMOL JAGGANATH RUCHKE Vs. SAU. ARCHANA AMOL RUCHKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issues involved in these family court appeals are similar and they arise from the common judgment of the Family Court, dated 05/11/2011, they are heard together and are decided by this common judgment.

(2.) The appellant in both the family court appeals is the husband, who had instituted proceedings against the respondent wife for a decree of dissolution of marriage under section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The respondent wife had filed proceedings under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights. The marriage was solemnized between the parties on 26/06/2005 at Akola, as per Hindu rites and customs. It is pleaded by the husband in the petition filed by him for a decree of divorce that since the inception of the marriage, the behaviour of the wife towards the husband and his mother was not good. It is pleaded that the wife used to avoid doing the domestic work and the mother of the husband was required to do the entire work in the house. It is pleaded that the mother of the husband was suffering from heart and blood pressure problems, however, the wife used to behave arrogantly with the mother. It is pleaded that at the time of the marriage, the wife had falsely stated her birth date to be 22/02/1977 though her date of birth was 30/06/1975. It is stated that whenever the husband enquired about the correct date of birth of the wife, the wife refused to give satisfactory answers and used to pick up quarrel with the husband. It is pleaded that on every festival the wife used to demand new ornaments for herself on the pretext that in her parental home there was a custom to prepare gold ornaments for the woman on every festival. It is pleaded that whenever the husband refused to make gold ornaments for the wife, she used to abuse the husband. It is pleaded that the wife used to pick up quarrel with the husband and his mother without any rhyme or reason. It is pleaded that when the husband informed the father of the wife about her conduct, instead of giving her an understanding, the father of the wife made a telephonic call to the grandfather of the husband, Shri Ramkrushna Gole and threatened him that the husband should mend his ways. It is pleaded that when Shri Ramkrushna Gole and his wife had been to Akola and wanted to visit the father of the wife, he refused to meet them. It is pleaded that in Aug., 2006, the wife picked up quarrel with the husband and threatened to implicate the husband and his mother in false criminal cases. It is pleaded that the wife not only threatened the husband, but also went to the police station at Akola and lodged a report against the husband and his mother. It is pleaded that when the police found that there was no substance in the report, they did not take any cognizance of the matter. It is pleaded that the wife had apologized for her behaviour and had promised to mend her ways. It is pleaded that the parties again resumed cohabitation after the said incident, but the wife did not mend her ways. It is pleaded that the wife used to give threats to the husband that she would commit suicide and implicate the husband and his relatives in false criminal cases. It is pleaded that the husband had tried to lodge a report against the wife in respect of her threats, but since the police did not make an enquiry in the matter, the wife started harassing the husband to a greater extent. It is pleaded that on 09/04/2007 also, the wife picked up quarrel with the husband and threatened that she would falsely implicate the husband and his mother. It is pleaded that the mother of the husband was required to be admitted to the hospital because of the behaviour of the wife. It is pleaded that on 09/04/2007, the wife, the husband, his mother and grandmother had been to the police station, but the police did not take any cognizance of the matter. It is pleaded that the wife is residing with her parents since 09/04/2007. It is pleaded that on 26/05/2007 the wife again made a complaint before the Mahila Takrar Nivaran Manch and in pursuance of the said complaint, an offence was registered against the husband and his mother and the husband had to secure anticipatory bail. It is pleaded that the act on the part of the wife of lodging false complaints against the husband, has caused mental agony to the husband. It is pleaded that the wife delivered a male child on 15/10/2007 and on the same day she issued a notice to the husband from the hospital that he should return all her belongings, including the gold, silver and the other household articles within seven days or else, appropriate action would be taken against him. It is pleaded that instead of taking care of the newly born, the wife had issued a false notice to the husband though the wife had carried all her belongings to her parental home when she left the matrimonial home on 09/04/2007. It is pleaded that it was decided between the parties that the marriage expenses would be shared by both the parties and in view of the said agreement, a sum of Rs.32,000/was paid by the husband to the brother of the wife. The husband pleaded that on 09/04/2007, the wife had left the matrimonial home with all her belongings that were carried by her in about 8 to 10 suitcases. On the aforesaid pleadings, the husband sought a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty.

(3.) The wife filed the written statement and denied every adverse allegation that was made by the husband against her. The wife pleaded that the husband had levelled false allegations against the wife. The wife pleaded that since the husband was aware that the wife would not be ready for the dissolution of the marriage, he had levelled false allegations against her. It is pleaded that the wife had to suffer violence at the hands of the husband. It is pleaded that though the family members of the wife had asked the husband to mend his ways, the husband refused to do so. It is pleaded that the wife does not have any reason to commit suicide and the allegations made by the husband that the wife threatened the husband and his mother that she would commit suicide and falsely implicate them in criminal proceedings is false and baseless. The wife pleaded that she was behaving like a dutiful wife in the matrimonial home. The wife pleaded that the husband and his family members used to ill treat her on the ground that they did not get proper dowry at the time of marriage, that the marriage was not celebrated with pomp and splendour. and that the husband had to consent for the marriage in a great haste. It is pleaded that the husband used to drive the wife, out of the house at night on a number of occasions. The wife pleaded that the husband had secured her signatures on blank stamp papers. The wife sought for the dismissal of the petition filed by the husband. In the petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the wife, the wife reiterated the facts pleaded by her in the written statement filed by her in the proceedings filed by the husband for a decree of divorce. In the petition for restitution of conjugal rights, the wife had stated that the husband had driven her out of the matrimonial home on 09/04/2007 and that she was compelled to reside with her parents since then.