DHRUV SINGH Vs. YAGYAVANTI @ RADHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS first appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff/appellant under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 25.09.2009 passed by the Court of Third Additional District Judge, District Morena (Shri K.K. Sharma) in Case No.87/08 whereby the application filed by the appellant for divorce under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act has been dismissed.

(2.) THE admitted facts are that on 15.2.1996 the marriage of the appellant/plaintiff with the respondent was solemnized according to Hindu rituals and customs at Agra. Earlier a suit No.49A/98 Ex- P/1 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights was filed by the plaintiff on 11.7.98 and it was dismissed on 29.6.2000 vide Ex-P/2 in the absence of the plaintiff. The defendant filed a petition under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. M.J.C. No.111/02 for maintenance against the plaintiff in the Family Court at Agra in the year 2002 which was decided through compromise between the parties in the year 2004. In this appeal, the appellant is referred as 'plaintiff' and the respondent as 'defendant'.

(3.) DENYING the plaint averments the defendant filed the written statement stating therein that since the date of her marriage the plaintiff and his family members had been continuously treating her with cruelty. They did not permit her to use the jewellery given by her father. In November 1996 her father-in-law Jagman Singh assaulted her and raped her in the absence of her husband. When she complained about this to her husband she was brutally beaten by her husband and other in-laws. Thereafter on 17.8.97 she was taken by her husband and dropped at her parental house without any reason. Her husband and her father-in-law sternly told her to bring a motorcycle and Rs.31,000/- from her father when she return. Hence, the defendant was compelled to file the suit for maintenance in the year 2002. When she did so the plaintiff agreed to live with her and the matter was settled on 17.9.04 and she was taken back by the plaintiff on 26.9.04. In the year 2005, the defendant gave birth to a male child. Thereafter her husband and his family members again began to misbehave with her and on 4.7.06 she was dropped by her husband at her parent's house since then she has been residing with her father along with her son. The plaintiff is not a man of good character and he has illicit relationship with other women. The defendant has never deserted the plaintiff. On the other hand, she has been deserted by the plaintiff without any proper reason. Hence, the plaintiff is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for in the suit and the suit filed by the plaintiff deserves to be dismissed.