LAKHVINDER SINGH Vs. SUKHVINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant. The appeal has been filed by Lakhvinder Singh -appellant against the judgment and decree dated 10.05.2013 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Ad hoc) Fast Track Court, Hoshiarpur whereby the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Act -for short) filed by the respondent -Sukhvinder Kaur seeking dissolution of the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce has been accepted and the marriage between the parties has been dissolved.

(2.) THE respondent -Sukhvinder Kaur filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act inter alia stating that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 27.11.1997 as per Sikh rites and ceremonies at village Phuglana, Tehsil and Distt. Hoshiarpur. After marriage both the parties cohabited as husband and wife at village Kaboolpur, Distt. Jalandhar. They had two children from the marriage, who were residing with the respondent -Sukhvinder Kaur. According to the respondent -Sukhvinder Kaur, sufficient dowry including gold ornaments weighing about 20 tolas, television, fridge, washing machine, scooter, two steel almirahs, three big steel boxes, furniture, utensils etc. were given; besides, clothes were also given to the appellant, his parents and relatives. An amount of Rs. 12 lacs was spent on the marriage. The father of the respondent was residing in Canada and the respondent was living with Jodh Singh, as his daughter. He was the mother's sister's husband ('massar') of the respondent. The marriage of the respondent was performed by Jodh Singh as he was like her father. The appellant, his parents and other family members were not satisfied with the dowry that was given in the marriage. They used to raise different demands time and again. The respondent was taunted by the parents of the appellant by saying that the dowry was not as per their expectations. She was being compelled to bring a car from her parents. At the time of birth of the daughter of the respondent on 25.12.1999, there was resentment as she had given birth to a girl. The respondent and his parents did not bear the expenses of delivery which were borne by Jodh Singh as he was like a father of the respondent. At the time of birth of her son namely Harjot Singh, gold ornaments, sweets and cash were given to the appellant and his parents. The respondent came to know that the appellant was a drug addict and used to take liquor; besides, he consumed intoxicating tablets in heavy quantity.

(3.) ON notice, the appellant appeared and filed a written statement in which he denied and controverted the allegations of the respondent. It is submitted that the marriage between the parties was a simple marriage. Only items of normal use were given at the time of marriage. No gold ornaments weighing 20 tolas were given as alleged. Only some ornaments were given to the respondent by her parents; besides, valuable ornaments were also given by the parents of the appellant to the respondent which were in her possession. An expense of Rs. 12 lacs being incurred on the marriage is denied. The allegation that the appellant or his parents taunted the respondent for dowry and were dissatisfied with the dowry articles were also denied. The allegation regarding demand for dowry are stated to be concocted. It is also denied that the appellant or his parents had refused to bear the hospital expenses for delivery of child. The hospital bill was paid by the father of the appellant. The appellant was never unhappy over the birth of a daughter. The appellant and his parents had full love and affection for the children and also for the respondent. The appellant never misbehaved with the respondent and never beat her as alleged. It is admitted by the appellant that he had started taking some intoxicant/drugs but later on he got himself treated. At present he was not taking any kind of drug and was living a normal life. He was working as a taxi driver. The appellant denied that he sold any jewellery of the respondent. He never beat the respondent. He never demanded money for drugs from the respondent. The respondent it is alleged left her matrimonial home on 23.01.2010 along with her children. The father of the appellant gave some money to her for expenses. She left the house without any dispute with promise to come back. Thereafter, she refused to come back and join her matrimonial home. The parents of the appellant went to bring her back on 28.01.2010. The appellant and his parents also took Panchayat but the respondent refused to join the matrimonial home. It is also submitted that Jodh Singh and his wife were living alone and to over come their loneliness they had influenced the respondent and persuaded her to live with them along with her children. The respondent had withdrawn from the society of the appellant without any sufficient cause. The appellant had already filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act, which was pending.