RATTAN LAL Vs. SANTOSH DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from a composite order where by the District Judge, Gurgaon, has kept the parties at par by dismissing respondent -wife's application under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (for short, the Act) and the appellant-husband's counter claim under section 23-A of the Act for a decree of divorce on the twin grounds of cruelty and desertion on her part.

(2.) In her application under section 9 of the Act, the respondent in order to establish that the appellant husband had turned her out of the house and had thus deserted or at least had withdrawn from her society without any reasonable cause or justifiable reason, alleged that he was carrying on with a cousin of his, that is, Krishna Devi, who admittedly was the daughter of his aunt's brother. Not only this, even earlier in a petition filed by her under section 13 of the Act for a decree of divorce, she had pleaded the same very ground but the said petition was dismissed as withdrawn on the basis of her statement dated August 20, 1980. As already indicated, in reply to the present petition under section 9 of the Act, the appellant took up a specific plea that the respondent not only in her present petition but in her earlier petition dated February 7, 1980 (Petition No. 3 of 1980) also had levelled false, unfounded and reckless allegations that he was having illicit relations with Smt. Krishna Devi and this was a cause or source of great anguish and torture to him and thus the respondent wife was guilty of cruelty towards him. In support of this stand of his, he made a detailed reference to the contents of the earlier petition filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Act (Exhibit R.l) and even to the contents of the present petition filed by her under section 9 of the Act.

(3.) As per the conclusion of the trial Court, the respondent has completely failed to substantiate this allegation levelled by her more than once. However, the Court has declined to grant relief to the appellant on the ground that he had failed to establish that this allegation, though frivolous and baseless, had in any way caused any mental or physical cruelty to him. This conclusion of the lower Court, to my mind, is just contrary to the settled proposition of law as per the various pronouncements of this Court as well as the final Court that a false and unfounded allegation of adultery or unchastity against a spouse amounts to cruelty in the eye of law. Paras Ram v. Kamlesh, 1982 AIR(P&H) 60. The respondent to my mind, could not inflict worst type of mental, cruelty upon the appellant by levelling these false allegations.