HARISH TANEJA Vs. NIDHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant appeal has been preferred by the husband - Harish Taneja, against the judgment and decree dated 27th January, 2017, passed by the Ld. District Judge, Panchkula, (in short 'Ld. Court below'), vide which the petition filed by him, under Section 13(1) (i-a)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), seeking dissolution of his marriage with the respondent-wife/Nidhi, was dismissed.

(2.) A few facts necessary for adjudication of the case, as pleaded in the petition filed by the appellant-husband (petitioner therein) before the Ld. Court below, may be noticed.

(3.) The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 24th February, 2004 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. One son was born out of the said wedlock on 30th January, 2005. The parties after their marriage resided at Delhi with the appellant-husband's brother and mother. The behaviour of the wife was cruel towards her mother-in-law with whom she would often misbehave. She would even use unparliamentary language against the husband which caused him a great deal of mental pain, agony and embarassment. There was also a lot of interference by her parents and on their insistence she would pressurize the appellant-husband to claim his share in the property and move out of the house. He kept up with her uncalled for and nasty behaviour in the hope that better sense would prevail upon her but in vain. The wife even threatened to abort the foetus when she was expecting their child. Their child was delivered at Panchkula, even though the husband had got all arrangements made for the delivery of the child at Delhi. It was alleged that the wife neglected the new born baby by not nursing him as she felt that it would lead to body disfigurement and as a result of which, the child contracted infections and medical complications. When the son's mundan ceremony was to be performed, the wife did not even bother to inform him about the same, which naturally caused him immense agony. On 25th December, 2005, when the husband went to her father and tried to catch wind about the reason behind her indifferent and callous behaviour, he was informed that she was under psychiatric treatment and would recover in 6 to 12 months. However, her behaviour only worsened with the passage of time. On 23rd February, 2006, she left her matrimonial home with her father after collecting all her belongings. Despite the consistent and earnest efforts of the appellant-husband to iron out their differences, there was no success. On the contrary, he was threatened with dire consequences. The appellant-husband pleaded that he had been deserted by her w.e.f. 23rd February, 2006 and all his endeavours to reconcile had bitten dust. His marriage with the respondent-wife be thus dissolved on the grounds of 'desertion' and 'cruelty'.