BEANT KAUR Vs. GURMAIL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is by the wife against the dismissal of the petition for divorce on the ground that the husband was guilty of cruelty. The instances of cruelty were that after the marriage, the parents of the husband were demanding more dowry and they kept pestering her for bringing more dowry. It was also suggested by the petitioner that the husband used to come home drunk with his friends and he would ask coffee or tea and when the petitioner did not comply with the same, he would insult her in front of others. Both the instances were refuted by the husband. The wife had a further grievance that the husband had made misrepresentation about his age as though he was born in the year 1974 but he was more than 40 years of age. The further allegation was that there had been a misrepresentation about his educational status also. The husband denied these allegations also and he reiterated in evidence that he was born only in the year 1974 and that further there had been no form of misrepresentation about his educational status. He was admitted to have failed in 10th standard. The alleged misrepresentation as to age and educational qualifications had been stated in the passing and it was not specifically contended in the petition that these alleged misrepresentations were about essential features that brought about the marriage so that they could be treated as vitiating circumstances for securing the consent of the petitioner for marriage.

(2.) IT is an admitted case that the husband himself filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights and the case was still pending at the time of the trial. For whatever reason, the application for restitution of conjugal rights had not been taken up along with the petition which is now the subject appeal by appropriate orders for transfer for trial of both the cases at the same Court. The husband had also set out some objections about the territorial jurisdiction of the Court but did not pressforth the contentions and the trial went through with both parties examining the respective witnesses. Nothing clear as regards the alleged cruel conduct of the husband had been brought out in evidence. The Tribunal did not also find any substance in the alleged misrepresentations said to have been made by the husband. The grounds alleged by the petitioner had been found by the trial Court as not established and it proceeded to dismiss the petition. I do not find any material to reverse the findings rendered by the trial Court. The decree of the trial court is, therefore, confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.