SURINDER KUMAR ARYA Vs. PREM CHANDER SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of the Additional District Judge, Sirsa, who had dismissed the petition filed by the present appellant under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage, on 14-3-1989.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner, hereinafter referred to as the appellant, as set up by him in the Divorce petition, is that the marriage between the the parties was performed on 12-10-1984 and a daughter was born out of their wedlock on 1-11-1985. As per allegations, the respondent-wife obtained a job of Lecturer in Govt. Senior Secondary School Risalia Khera through Employment Exchange on 26-11-1985, where she worked upto August 1987. The respondent-wife got herself mutually transferred with some other Lecturer from Panniwala Mota to Risalia Khera, where she joined on 11-12-1987, but the respondent resided in village Risalia Khera throughout this period. According to the appellant, the respondent had developed illicit relations with respondent No. 2. In January, 1986 when she came to see the appellant at Sirsa, she was asked by the appellant to discontinue her relations with the said respondent No.-2, who was working as PTI Teacher in her school at Risalia Khera. Upon this, the respondent felt annoyed and left the house of the appellant saying that in future she would never reside with him. It is further averred in the petition that on 26-7-1987 the appellant along with one Ram Partap, Lambardar of village Nunianwali Visited Risalia Khera and requested the respondent not to reside in the same room in which respondent No. 2 was residing and to arrange separate accommodation for her. The respondent. . . wife refused to accede to this request of the appellant. The appellant again visited village Panniwala Mota on 6-9-1987 and 22-11-1987 alongwith his cousin Satya Dev in order to pursuade the respondent-wife not to reside with respondent No. 2 On both the occasions, the appellant was not found in village Panniwala Mota and on enquiry, they come to know that the respondent had gone to village Risalia Khera. As such, the appellant had suffered a grave mental torture On 26-11-1987, the appellant's father became seriously ill and as desired by his father, the appellant had gone to village Panniwala, where the respondent was posted in order to bring her and her daughter. On reaching there, the appellant came to know that the respondent had gone to Risalia Khera. The appellant then went to village Risalia Khera through a Taxi and went to the room Prem Chand, respondent No. 2. , where both the respondents were found in such a dress from which it was presumed by the appellant that they were having advance stage of relations as they were sleeping in one room at night which had caused the appellant mental agony.

(3.) THE case was contested by the respondents. The respondents in their written statements denied the allegations of the appellant Respondent No. 2 in this affidavit denied the visit of the appellant to his house on 26-11-1987 and also the factum of staying of respondent No. 1 Chander Kanta with him on that day or on any other day. Smt. Chander Kanta in her statement had taken a stand that in August 1987 she was turned out of the house by the appellant and since then she has been residing separately It was also mentioned in the written statement that the appellant and his parents are greedy persons. In the beginning, the appellant was not ready for his marriage with respondent No. 1, but subsequently he agreed and immediately after the marriage, the appellant and his parents started harassing her on the ground of bringing less dowry.