SURINDER KAUR Vs. GURDIP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Marriage between the parties was solemnized on November 8, 1992. In 1985, the appellants became pRegulation nt. She went to her parential house to deliver a child in July 1985. She delivered a male child on August 8, 1985 but he died three or four days thereafter.

(2.) This petition of the husband under Section 13(1-A) (ii) of the Act was contested by the wife but ultimately it was decreed by the Additional District Judge, Ludhiana on February 6, 1990. The wife has impugned the said decree.

(3.) The sole argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is that since after passing of the decree dated November 20, 1987 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the husband did not take any steps to take her to his house and did not afford her an opportunity to live with him honourably, the learned Additional Judge was wrong in holding that there was no fault on the part of the petitioner which will disentitle him to the decree of divorce. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that it is established on record that the husband had been making repeated efforts before and after passing of the decree under Section 9 of the Act to bring the wife to his house but she had refused to come and therefore, no fault could be found with the impugned judgment.