ARUNDHATI DEEPAK PATIL Vs. DEEPAK BHAURAO PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the Judgment and order dated 22. 6. 2006 rendered by Family Court in Petition no. A-1567 of 2000 filed by the respondent-husband seeking a decree of divorce under section 13 (1) (ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, "the act" ). By the impugned judgment, the marriage of the appellant-Arundahti (for short, "the respondent") and the respondent-Deepak (for short, "the petitioner") has been dissolved on both the grounds, that is, cruelty and desertion. The operative portion of the impugned judgment reads thus:

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the petitioner and the respondent got married on 26. 12. 1994. At the time of their marriage both were employed. After the marriage, in June -July, 1995 the respondent took admission for Engineering Degree course in S. P. college of Engineering at Andheri, Mumbai. She appeared for the first and second Semesters in october, 1995 and April, 1996 respectively. In October, 1996, the respondent conceived and, thereafter, left her job. According to the petitioner, at that time, in the course of medical investigation it was revealed that prior to the marriage the respondent was suffering from Multi nodular Goiter with Hypothyroidism. In March-April, 1997 the respondent went to her maternal home for delivery. On 6. 7. 1997, she gave birth to a female child. On 12. 10. 1997, the respondent came back to her matrimonial home with her daughter- Hardiki. On 16. 5. 1998, according to the petitioner, the respondent left the matrimonial home along with Hardiki in a fit of rage and then returned on 22. 6. 1998. Again, on 23. 6. 1998 she went to her maternal home and returned on 7. 7. 1998. Then she lived with the petitioner for hardly four days and again on 11. 7. 1998 left the matrimonial home and never returned again. It appears that on 15. 7. 1998 a police complaint (N. C. No. 5. 8. 98) was lodged by the petitioner against the respondent with Vile Parle Police Station. In October, 1998, the respondent once again took up a job. On 21. 10. 2000, the respondent filed the petition in the family Court seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

(3.) BEFORE the Family Court, the petitioner, in support of the grounds for divorce, examined himself (PW 1), his father Bhaurao Patil (PW 2), their maid servant Manisha dhavade (PW 3), his maternal uncle Ulhaskumar Patil (PW 4)and Vasantrao Sawant (PW 5), the retired Principal who acted as a mediator for resolving the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent. As against this, the respondent examined herself (RW 1), her mother Vidhya gharat (RW 2) and her sister Swapanali Gharat (RW 3 ). Based on the evidence of these witnesses, examined by the petitioner and the respondent, the Family Court held that the respondent had treated the petitioner with cruelty and she deserted him without any reasonable cause for two years preceding the presentation of the petition. Insofar as custody of the child is concerned, the Family Court granted custody of Hardiki to the respondent with access to the petitioner and further granted Rs. 1800/- per month towards the maintenance of the daughter-Hardiki.