KAJAL Vs. JAGSIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Kajal has come up in appeal against the judgment dtd. 2/9/2019 whereby respondent-Jagsir Singh has been granted divorce under Sec. 13 of Hindu Marriage Act. The marriage of the appellant was solemnized with respondent No.1 on 27/10/2010 at Chandigarh as per Hindu Rites and Ceremonies. The marriage was very simple as it was love marriage. After the marriage, the parties resided together upto November 2014 at Sunam but no child was born out of their wedlock. Respondent No. 1 filed a divorce petition on the plea that from the very inception of the marriage, appellant-wife showed her true nature towards respondent No.1. She started stressing upon respondent No.1 to transfer his property in her name and to reside in a separate accommodation from his mother. On refusal, appellant-wife started quarrelling with respondent No.1 and his mother on one pretext or the other. The appellant used to create unpleasant scenes as and when the relatives and friends of respondent No.1 visited the house of respondent No.1. The mother of respondent No. 1 disowned the appellant and respondent No. 1 from her movable and immovable property. Finally respondent No.1-husband started residing separately at Barnala in the month of April 2011 in a rented accommodation. Appellant-wife was doing job at Trident Company, Barnala and having superiority complex. Finally appellant-wife shifted to village Chahat and developed illicit relations with respondent No.2. In the month of November, 2014, she left her matrimonial home on the behest of respondent No.2-Gurjit Singh and started residing with him.

(2.) On notice of the petition under Sec. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, appellant-wife filed written statement taking plea that both the parties were residing at matrimonial home from the date of marriage and a male child was born in the year 2016 out of their wedlock. She filed petition under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C. against respondent No.1 as he was neglecting her and was not fulfilling his matrimonial obligation. She was never paid maintenance amount by respondent No. 1. The respondent No.1- husband had got registered false FIR against the appellant in connivance with the police. This FIR was cancelled after proper inquiry.

(3.) The divorce has been granted to the respondent No.1-husband on the ground of cruelty. In para 19 of the judgment, it has been observed that as per birth certificate, a male child was born to appellant-wife on 9/2/2016 where father's name of said child has been mentioned as Gurjit Singh. Copy of register from the office of Births and Deaths Registrar, Patiala is on file as Ex.P1, where a son is shown to have been born to appellant-wife at Sr. No. 540 and father's name of said child has been mentioned as Gurjit Singh. An FIR was lodged by respondent No.1 against the appellant-wife under Sec. 494/380/120-B IPC which was placed as Ex.P3, however no evidence was led to show that FIR was quashed. The appellant-wife appeared as RW1 and admitted that a son was born to her on 9/2/2016 in Mata Kaushalya Hospital, Patiala and as per birth certificate (Ex.P2), father's name of newly born child was mentioned as Gurjit Singh. No other witness was examined to support the case. The appellant-wife did not lead any witness to support her case that FIR (Ex.P3) was quashed and name of the father of the child shown as Gurjit Singh as per birth certificate (Ex.P2) was wrong. Hence on issue No.1, the finding of cruelty was given against appellant-wife.