LAWS(MPH)-2007-6-34

ANURADHA PRAFULL VAIDH Vs. PRAFULL VAIDH

Decided On June 27, 2007
Anuradha Prafull Vaidh Appellant
V/S
Prafull Vaidh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 assailing the judgment and decree dated 5.8.2005 passed by the Family Court, Indore in HMA Case No. 419/93, by which the application filed by the respondent under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act has been allowed.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that the appellant and respondent were married on 21.11.1986 at Indore as per Hindu Rites and after marriage one daughter Kumari Vandana was born from their wedlock, at present she is residing along with appellant. It is also not in dispute that on 31.7.2000 appellant had submitted a criminal complaint against the respondent and his mother and father in Mahila Police Station, Indore under Sections 498-A and 406 of Indian Penal Code. In that case the respondent was taken into custody and the father and mother were released on anticipatory bail. On filing challan in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class Indore, they were convicted vide judgment dated 18-2-2003 and directed to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- each. Against the said judgment a criminal appeal was preferred bearing No. 103/2003, which was allowed by the VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Indore on 7-11-2003 and the judgment passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore was set-aside.

(3.) IN reply to divorce petition, the appellant denied all the averments of cruelty and desertion as alleged in the petition except the date of marriage, birth of daughter and filing of criminal proceedings under Section 498-A. It was also denied that the appellant had insisted upon respondent to reside separately from his family members. In counter, the appellant has made the allegation of cruelty and desertion committed by the respondent. It is said that the appellant is residing with her daughter to whom Rs. 900/- has been awarded as maintenance, which is not yet paid by the respondent. It is also said that on 15-6-2000 respondent and his mother had assaulted her and thereafter repeated the same on 30-6-2000 and at about 11 P.M. in the night, she was pushed out from their house. However, prayer is made to dismiss the divorce petition.