RAJINDER PAUL SINGH Vs. AMARJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT -Rajinder Paul Singh has filed this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 1.12.1989 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, whereby the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the grant of decree of divorce has been dismissed.

(2.) THE appellant filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, for dissolution of the marriage between the parties by grant of decree of divorce. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 31.5.1982, according to Sikh rites, at village Jassowal Sudan, tehsil and district Ludhiana. After marriage, the parties lived and cohabited as husband and wife at village Pamal, tehsil and district Ludhiana. No child was born out of the wedlock. The appellant-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, for dissolution of the marriage between the parties, on the ground that the respondent had withdrawn herself from his company without any reasonable cause to harass him. It was alleged that the respondent-wife had filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act and decree for restitution of conjugal rights was passed in her favour on 16.1.1988. The respondent never had any intention to live with him as his wife. She had filed numerous court cases against him to harass him. Besides, she had made complaints to the Punjab Police Department, where the appellant is serving as a constable. The case of the appellant is that there has been no cohabitation between the parties since 25.8.1984 and therefore, he was entitled for the grant of decree of divorce in terms of section 13(1-A)(ii) of the Act. The respondent has engaged the appellant in litigation by filing case after case against him in which she claimed interim maintenance and litigation expenses. The appellant was also compelled to incur expenses in defending the cases. A petition was also pending under Section 25 of the Act for permanent alimony filed by the respondent. On these grounds, he claims divorce.

(3.) THE petitioner has filed replication to the written statement, in which he has denied the averments made in the written statement and reiterated those taken in his petition.