SAVITRI Vs. RAMESH CHANDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Additional District Judge, Kernal, dated May 9, 1979, whereby the petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13(iv) of the Hindu Marriage Act. (hereinafter called the Act), filed by the respondent-husband against the appellant-wife was allowed and a decree of divorce was passed.

(2.) According to the admitted facts, the marriage between the spouses was solemnized on April 14, 1967, at Karnal. Out of the wedlock, a son was born on April 24, 1968. Subsequent thereto, separation between the husband and the wife took place in June, 1969. The petition for divorce was filed by the respondent-husband after more than seven years, that is, on September 16, 1976. The learned trial Court held that desertion by the appellant was proved and her contention that the petition for divorce had been filed after improper and unnecessary delay was also repelled.

(3.) According to the averments in the petition, the appellant was always insisting on the respondent to leave his job and to start business with her brothers and also to live with her parents. It was also urged that she wanted him to sever all connections with his parents. As he did not agree to this extraordinary proposal, the appellant left him towards the end of June, 1969, and took all her belongings with her various Panchayats were taken to bring her back, but neither the appellant nor her brothers were agreeable. All the averments were denied by the appellant in her written statement. On the other hand, it was alleged that the respondent was moving about with undesirable girls and he refused to live with her at his place of posting. It was also urged that she was always willing to go to the respondent and to live with him. It was also averred that efforts were made in the form of panchaynts to persuade the respondent to except her along with her child, but to no success. Her offer to live with her husband at his place of posting was also reiterated. A preliminary objection was also raised that the petition being belated and having been filed after about seven years of the alleged separation was likely to be dismissed on this ground alone. In view of the pleadings of the parties, two issues were framed regarding desertion by the appellant and improper or unnecessary delay in filing the petition for divorce.