DEVINDER KUMAR SHARMA Vs. DEVI RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The parties were married at Phagwara on February 22, 1973 according to Hindu rites. Thy lived together for about eight months at different places and according to the version of the husband, the wife left him on June 4, 1974 with an intention never to revert to the matrimonial home. It was also averred that during her stay she had proved to be a quarrel-some nature and had been subjecting him to unabating mental torture. He, therefore, filed this petition under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act on July 13, 1979, for dissolution of their marriage on the ground of desertion and cruelty.

(2.) The petition was opposed by the wife who controverted the allegation made in the petition and instead pleaded that it was the husband who had turned her out because he was dissatisfied with the dowry brought by her at the time of marriage. She also pleaded that the petition has been filed after an inordinate delay of 5 years and as a counter blast to the application under section 125, Criminal Procedure Code, filed by her fog maintenance. The trial Court after recording evidence of the parties negatived the pleas of the husband and also held that the petition had been filed after inordinate delay of five years for which no reasonable explanation had been offered. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, the husband has come up in this appeal.

(3.) The finding on the issue of desertion was not challenged by the learned counsel for the appellant and the same is accordingly confirmed. As regards the plea of the cruelty, the same was sought to be supported not on any of the grounds urged in the petition but on a new ground based on the admission of the respondent in her statement in the Court. in her cross-examination, the respondent admitted that she had made a complaint to the police under section 107, Criminal Procedure Code, against the father and brother of the husband for taking security proceedings against them and that complaint was dismissed. These false allegations according to the learned counsel for the appellant would amount to mental cruelty. The argument, in my view, has no merit. This complaint was made in the year 1976 and the present petition was filed in the year 1979. The complaint made against the father and brother of the appellant, therefore, never injured his feelings and caused such annoyance as would amount to mental cruelty. Had it been so, he would have immediately moved in the matter. Moreover, this ground was never pleaded in the petition which also show that he never felt offended from this act of the wife. Otherwise also from the finding of the criminal court it cannot he said that the wife had made a false complaint and unless she was given an opportunity to substantiate her accusations relief cannot be granted on its basis. The two decisions relied upon by the learned counsel in Smt. Jiwan Lata v. Krishan Kumar, 1979, 1979 CurLJ 509. and Smt. Rajinder Kumari v. Daryodhan Lal,1980 MarriLJ 169, have no bearing on the facts of the present case as the accusation made in these cases were of very grave nature.