PADMINI Vs. HEMANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INITIALLY the correctness of the decree of divorce passed by ITT Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Ujjain in H.M. Case No. 54 -A of 89 on 27th Nov., 1990 on the ground of cruelty in terms of Section 13(ia) of the Act was under challenge in this appeal presented under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, 'the Act') joint prayer for decree of divorce on mutual consent in terms of Section 13B of the Act has, however, materially altered the complexion of the controversy.

(2.) FACTS are (sic). Parties were married on 22.11.81 according to vedic rites at Mandsaur. The appellant came to the matrimonial home on 23.11.81 and stayed there till 13.12.81. On 14.12.81, she returned to parental home. During the sojourn between 23.11.81 and 13.12.81, the appellant denied consummation of the marriage and resisted cohabitation on the pretaxt that she suffered from the ailment of bleeding and was unit for sexual intercourse. The respondent was in service at Vidisha. It was also pleaded that the appellant desired to marry someone else and invariably delivered threat to commit suicide on protest. She wrote letters marked as Exh. P/3 to P/6 disclosing her desire to snap the relationship. The appellant denied the allegation emphatically. She pleaded that she was cajoled to pen letters under the influence of liquor which she was compelled to consume. She claimed that her husband indicated disapproval of the marriage and exhibited repulsion. She was categorised as a 'mad' girl. It was asserted that she was never cruel and on the other hand, she was treated with cruelty on account of unsatisfied demand of dowry. It was also stated that the husband has contracted marriage with another woman and had voluntary sexual intercourse with her. She also denied allegations of plan of marriage and threat about suicide.

(3.) THE appellant, dissatisfied by the verdict, has presented this appeal.