AMITA PATHAK Vs. S. SHIV PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 26.2.2010 passed in Civil Suit No. 30-A/2009 by IIIrd Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) Katni dismissing the suit of the appellant, has filed present first appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of appellant Smt. Amita Pathak was solemnized with respondent S. Shiv Prasad on 15.1.2004 as per Hindu rites, religion and out of their wedlock, no child was born. Initially the appellant and respondent were living together in a joint family in Kerala but after a period of near-about two months, due to some stress, the appellant and respondent started living separately with the consent of their family members. Thereafter, the respondent started misbehaving, abusing, insulting and beating the appellant. He had badly tortured the appellant physically and mentally for two months. When appellant had asked the respondent that why he was behaving in such a manner then respondent told her that he had no proper source of income, therefore, she should get Rupees four or five lakh in dowry from her parents. If she fails, he would continue such bad behaviour. The appellant informed about the demand to her parents and her parents had arranged some money and gave to respondent. The respondent again started insulting and beating the appellant. Consequently, the appellant lodged a report at Police Station, Kottayam on 20.10.2006. The Police had warned the respondent, In the year 2007, the appellant had also informed about the bad behaviour of respondent to her younger brother and asked for his help. Her younger brother came along with his family and lived with the appellant for 20 days. He had also given some money to the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent asked the appellant to give her ornaments amounting to Rs. 5,00,000 for keeping them in a bank locker and started beating the appellant. On 30.4.2007, elder brother of appellant came to her house and suggested the respondent to live peacefully. But the respondent had replied that if he is paid Rs. 5,00,000 then only he would keep the appellant with him otherwise he would kill her.

(2.) The appellant also alleged that she did not have any physical or sexual relationship with the respondent after the marriage. He did not perform sexual intercourse with her. He had illicit relationship with other ladies. His first wife had committed suicide. The respondent was facing a charge punishable under Section 302 of IPC for murder of his first wife. The respondent had also threatened the appellant that he would commit suicide and falsely implicate her entire family. Being dissatisfied with the respondent, the appellant had filed present suit under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for seeking divorce against the respondent on the ground of cruelty and that both of them were living separately and there was no possibility of amicable settlement between them in future.

(3.) The respondent filed the written statement denying the allegations made in the petition and submitted that he had maintained her honour throughout the period she had lived with him in the matrimonial home. He had never demanded dowry. He deposited Rs. 5 lakh in her account. Her brother Amit Pathak had come to Kerala for his honeymoon and her another brother Ajit Pathak had come for treatment. She went to her parental house willfully with her brother Amit Pathak. After marriage, he gifted the ornaments to the appellant. He is running a business of electronic goods and his income is about Rs. 10 lakh per year. The appellant has always enjoyed sexual intercourse. Hence, no ground of divorce is made out and the petition deserves to be dismissed.