MANJUSHA JADHAV Vs. PRADEEP JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant/defendant has preferred this appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short "the Act"), as well as, I.A. No. 245/13, which is an application under Sections 25 and 26 of the Act read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, being aggrieved with the judgment and decree dated 26-7-2000 passed by II Additional District Judge, Bhopal in Regular Civil Suit No. 23-A/1999, whereby marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground as enumerated in Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act. It is an admitted fact that marriage of appellant-wife was solemnised with the respondent-husband in Bhopal on 19-5-1997 as per Hindu rites and rituals Thereafter, appellant stayed with the respondent in Bhopal and from the wedlock, they were blessed with a son on 1-4-1998.

(2.) Suit for divorce was filed by the respondent mainly on the ground of mental cruelty. Respondent pleaded that appellant used to ill-treat him and quarrel on petty matters. She used to threaten that she would commit suicide by consuming poisonous substance and without informing the respondent, frequently used to go to her parental home. She was in the habit of using foul language with the respondent and threatening him of incarceration. Besides this, she despised doing household chores. Respondent apprised her parents of her conduct, but instead of counseling her, they used to encourage her conduct. Within a period of six months, she visited her parental home for at least 15 times. After delivering her child, she stayed for 40 days in her parental home, and returned to her matrimonial house only after much persuasion on 20-5-1998. Thereafter, on 31-5-1998, she called her parents to her matrimonial home in the absence of respondent and after collecting household articles, jewellery clothing etc. left the house and despite several requests by the respondent, refused to return.

(3.) In response, appellant pleaded that she was always wiling to live with the respondent. In fact the respondent, at the behest of his parents, used to harass her and suit for divorce was also filed by the respondent at their instance only. In essence, she pleaded that she was continuously subjected to cruelty and harassment by the respondent for non-fulfillment of demand for dowry. Respondent used to beat her mercilessly and get her treated at 1250 Hospital by the doctors acquainted to him. She denied all the allegations leveled against her and prayed for dismissal of the suit.