ONKAR NATH Vs. SUSHILA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal under section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is made to the judgment and decree-dated 19.12.1996, passed by the 5th Additional District Judge, Rewa in Civil Suit No.8-A/1995. By the aforesaid judgment and decree, a suit filed by the appellant/husband for dissolution of the marriage under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, has been dismissed.

(2.) Parties herein were married in the year 1980 and it is the case of the appellant that ever since the marriage, the respondent wife started behaving in a very peculiar manner, she was harassing the appellant and his family members and her acts amounted to act of cruelty. It is stated that initially she sought for partition of the appellant's family property, thereafter made him stay separately from his family members. This was agreed to, but still she was not satisfied, she started harassing the family of the appellant and then deserted him. It is also stated that the respondent wife had some illicit relations with one of her brother-in-law and accordingly on the ground of desertion and illicit relations with the brother-in-law, the suit for divorce was filed. Respondent wife contested the same and denied the allegations of cruelty and adultery as alleged in the plaint. It was her case that out of the wedlock two children were born. The allegations of cruelty and adultery are wrong. The two sons were 11 years and 9 years of age respectively and it is stated by the respondent wife that false allegations have been alleged only to somehow get the marriage dissolved so that the appellant husband can remarry. Based on the rival contentions, five issues were framed. The first issued was as to whether the respondent wife has acted in a cruel manner. It was held that this issue has not been proved. The second issue was as to whether the cruelty of the respondent resulted in mental harassment to the appellant husband. This issue was also decided against the appellant. The third issue framed was as to whether the appellant without any justification or reason is refusing to look after his wife and children. This issue was answered in positive by holding that once the appellant is refusing to take care of his wife and children. The fourth issue framed was as to whether the appellant is entitled to a decree of divorce. It was held that the grounds alleged in the plaint are not proved and, therefore, the appellant is not entitled to decree of divorce.

(3.) Shri Aditya Adhikari and Shri Abhishek Gulati, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, took us through the statement of the appellant and his two witnesses namely PW/2 Naresh Singh and PW/3 Virendra Singh, and tried to emphasize that the allegations of adultery and desertion have been proved and inspite of their being cogent evidence in support of the contention, it was argued that in a perverse manner the learned court below has held the allegation to be not proved. That apart, it was argued by learned counsel at the time of hearing that in the proceedings that were held before the trial court, respondent wife had made serious allegations of adultery against the appellant by saying that the appellant is having illicit relations with his sister-in-law, this was a serious allegation and the trial court has found the same to be not proved. Accordingly, it was argued that when in a proceeding held under the Hindu Marriage Act, if one of the party makes serious allegations like allegation of adultery and the same is not proved, this amounts to cruelty and, therefore, on this ground the marriage can be dissolved.