SUSHMA Vs. SUNIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-wife has come up in appeal before this Court seeking setting aside of judgment and decree dtd. 5/2/2014 passed by the Additional District Judge, Panipat, whereby petition filed by the respondent-husband under Sec. 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the HMA') for a decree of divorce by way of dissolution of marriage, has been allowed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent-husband filed a petition under Sec. 13(1) of the HMA for a decree of divorce by way of dissolution of marriage pleading therein that marriage between the parties was solemnized according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 9/7/2005 at Vishanu Nagar, Gohana, District Sonepat, in a simple manner. No dowry was given or taken. The marriage was registered with the Registrar of Marriage at Gohana. The marriage was duly consummated and a male child namely, Gatik was born out of their wedlock. After marriage, parties resided in their home at NFL Township, Panipat. On the first night of the marriage when respondent tried to have sexual relationship with the appellant, he could not penetrate properly. On the next day, he consulted an expert doctor and got himself operated in Prabhakar Hospital and was advised bed rest for 15 days. As a result of which he could not make physical or sexual contact with the appellant for a period of about 20-25 days after the marriage. Thereafter, when respondent tried to have physical relationship with the appellant, she told him that she had conceived admitting that she had committed a wrong prior to the marriage as she was having a love affair with a boy prior to her marriage. Respondent suffered great mental pain, agony and went into depression. Appellant concealed the fact of her pregnancy prior to her marriage. Appellant was got medically examined at Hyderabadi Hospital and the fact of her pregnancy was confirmed. Thereafter, mother of the appellant took the appellant along with her to abort her pregnancy but left the appellant at her matrimonial home on 22/8/2005 without getting the pregnancy terminated. Appellant was again called at Hyderabadi Hospital for check up and further treatment on 27/8/2005. On the said date, Dr. Bharti Dhawan of Hyderabadi Hospital conducted ultrasound of the appellant and confirmed her pregnancy. Thereafter, pregnancy of the appellant was got terminated on 30/8/2005 and she continued receiving treatment from Dr. Bharti Dhawan after termination of her pregnancy. However, appellant did not mend her behavior and left respondent's company on 26/10/2005 leaving a written note mentioning that she was going to commit suicide for which she herself was responsible. Respondent contacted the appellant and asked her to come back. However, appellant asked the respondent to come to her parental home. In the last week of October, 2005, respondent went to the house of appellant to bring her back. Appellant asked him to gift a gold ring to her sister Sonia. After coming to his house, appellant again started mis- behaving with him and his parents. She even tried to manhandle her mother-in-law and threw a shoe upon her father-in-law. Respondent requested the appellant to mend her behaviour but she did not listen to him. Rather she raised a demand to live separately from her in-laws. He being the only son of his parents did not accede to her demand. When all efforts of the respondent to settle the matter failed, he started living separately from his parents at Village Barauli along with the appellant to run his married life smoothly. They resided at Village Barauli for about 3-4 months. She again started misbehaving with the respondent and refused to cook meals for him. Thereafter, both of them started residing at Yamuna Nagar. Appellant got admission in Sant Nischal Singh Education College to get JBT degree. Respondent joined a private job in Thopson Systems Pvt. Limited, Karnal. However, behaviour of the appellant did not change. Once she attacked the respondent with a knife and gave a blow of knife on his left wrist. Respondent was debarred from inheriting their immovable or movable properties by his parents through publication in Dainik Jagran dtd. 4/7/2006. In the month of August, 2007 appellant left the respondent's company without any sufficient reason and took away all the gold and silver jewellery and other valuable household articles and clothes. Respondent contacted the appellant and her family but they did not give any satisfactory reply. Appellant was pregnant at that time. Respondent asked the appellant to come to her matrimonial home for delivery but she refused. Respondent visited the parental house of the appellant a number of times with a request to join his company but in vain. Appellant gave birth to a male child, namely, Gatik on 21/10/2007. All the expenses on the delivery of the child were borne by the respondent. After the delivery of the child, respondent along with his relatives again tried to bring back the appellant. They convened a number of panchayats but the matter could not be settled. Appellant is working as a teacher in a school at Village Sikandarpur Majra, District Sonepat and drawing a salary of more than Rs.22,000.00 per month, whereas respondent is unemployed. Thus, appellant considers herself to be superior to respondent and has flatly refused to join his company. They have been living separately since August, 2007.

(3.) Appellant-wife contested the petition on the ground that petition was not maintainable. Respondent is himself estopped by his own act and conduct from filing the petition for grant of divorce. The petition was filed on false and vexatious grounds. Appellant-wife pleaded that sufficient dowry articles including jewellery, clothes, furniture and valuable gifts were given by her parents. However, respondent-husband and his family members were not satisfied with the dowry brought by her. They used to taunt and tease her. She used to be beaten and tortured mentally and physically. The marriage was duly consummated on the very first night of the marriage. She gave birth to a male child on 20/10/2007 at her parental home. All the expenses on the treatment and delivery were borne by her parents. Respondent did not care for her and the child. A false and concocted story of alleged cruelty and desertion has been narrated by the respondent-husband. Appellant denied that respondent was suffering from any kind of sexual disease. She further denied that the respondent could not make physical contact with her for a period of 20-25 days of the marriage. False allegations regarding her character have been made by the respondent. She had no love affair with any boy prior to her marriage. She was also not pregnant at the time of marriage. A false report was obtained by the respondent from the doctor. Appellant denied that she herself left her matrimonial home. Rather she was turned out of her matrimonial home on 21/10/2005 after giving her severe beatings. It was denied that she demanded a gold ring for her sister or that she ever threw a shoe upon her father-in-law. Averment made by the respondent to the effect that he is the only son of his parents is incorrect as he has a brother and a sister. Both his brother and sister, namely, Pankaj and Neelam have been living abroad. Brother of the respondent is also a divorcee. All the expenses on her education and stay at Yamuna Nagar were borne by appellant's parents. Respondent himself left her at her parental home. She denied that any panchayat was got convened by the respondent. She also denied that she refused to live with the respondent. Appellant also denied that respondent was unemployed. Respondent holds a masters degree in Tourism and Hotel Management. He has not cared to pay any money towards maintenance of his minor child. False and baseless allegations with regard to alleged cruelty have been made by the respondent. She thus sought dismissal of the petition.