KAILASH DEVI Vs. JAI KISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Act - for short) by the appellant-wife against the judgment and decree dated 20.8.1990 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak, whereby the petition of Jai Kishan respondent-husband for grant of divorce under Section 13 of the Act has been allowed.

(2.) THE facts leading to the case are that Jai Kishan respondent No. 1 husband of the appellant filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act for the grant of decree of divorce of the ground that the appellant is living in adultery with respondent No. 2 and has also treated him with cruelty. The marriage between the parties was solemnized at Delhi in April 1970. After marriage both the parties lived together in village Gawalison, Tehsil Jhajjar, District Rohtak. Through this wedlock, one daughter was born in October 1978. It has been alleged by respondent No. 1 that the appellant is a woman of unchaste character who has been living in adultery with respondent No. 2 and has inflicted many acts of cruelty on him. He has given the details of the cruelty in his petition. It is stated by the respondent-husband that he was serving in the army and was posted at different stations, while his wife was living with his aged parents. It was just by chance that illicit relationship of his wife with respondent No. 2 came to his notice in July, 1987 through a letter addressed by respondent No. 2 to his wife. It is averred that the letter handed over by the Postman to the father of the respondent-husband suggested that the appellant-wife was carrying on illicit relations and committing voluntary sexual intercourse with respondent No. 2 a resident of the village. When the respondent-husband is stated to have learnt about this he was shocked beyond measure and probed into this matter deeply. A lady and another resident of the village confirmed that the appellant-wife had been secretly visiting the house of the respondent No. 2 in the village at odd hours during 1987, 1988 and 1989 when they had personally seen her coming out of the house of respondent No. 2. The respondent-husband was disgusted with her conduct and stopped cohabiting with her. He advised his wife that she should leave this adulterous conduct and act like a chaste and loyal wife. She, however, reacted furiously and started hurling filthy abuses and insulted him even in the presence of others. The respondent-husband consequently lost his faith and apprehended in his mind that because of cruel and adulterous acts of the appellant-wife it was harmful and dangerous for him to live with her. When the respondent-husband again confronted his wife regarding her unchaste and cruel conduct in 1989 she left her matrimonial home, about three weeks earlier to the filing of the petition. She left in the absence of the respondent-husband after taking Rs. 10,000/- in cash and two tolas of gold ornaments belonging to the respondent-husband. The respondent-husband, however, did not give much publicity to this scandal for the sake of family honour. After the aforesaid letter was received from his wife's paramour (respondent No. 2), the respondent-husband had not condoned the acts of his wife's voluntary extra- marital sexual intercourse in any manner. On these grounds the respondent- husband prayed for the grant of a decree of divorce.

(3.) THE respondent-husband filed his replication to the petition, in which the averments made in the written statement were denied and those in his petition were reiterated. It was prayed that divorce be granted. On these pleadings the following issues were framed by the learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak on 23.4.1990 :-