KRISHNA DEVI Vs. PRABHU DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE marriage between the parties stands dissolved by a decree of divorce granted at the instance of the respondent husband. Though it was sought on the twin ground of desertion and cruelty but it is only the later ground which has been held to have been established.

(2.) BRIEFLY , the background of the case is that the parties to this litigation were married on 21st March, 1972. As per the allegation of the respondent, the appellant deserted him with effect from 6th May, 1973. Later she initiated proceedings under section 125, Code of Criminal Procedure, and succeeded therein vide judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge dated 25th October, 1976 (Ex. R3), tinder which she was allowed Rs. 50/ - p.m. as maintenance. This Court, however, enhanced this rate of maintenance to Rs. 100/ - p.m. The relations between the parties continued to be strained and surcharged even after the grant of this maintenance. At one stage, the appellant launched security proceedings against the respondent under section 107/151, Code of Criminal Procedure, but as a result of the enquiry that following he was discharged. Somewhere during the month of February, 1979, when one of the brothers of the appellant was missing from her parents house, a report of kidnapping was lodged with the police suspecting the respondent of that offence. Luckily for him, some time later the boy returned to his house of his own and, thus, he escaped the consequences or a serious prosecution.

(3.) ON 22nd April, 1979 the respondent filed the present application seeking a decree of divorce, as already indicated, on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. It deserves to be highlighted here that on 28th February, 1979, the parties agreed to dissolve the marriage by mutual agreement and in order to secure a decree to that effect under section 13 -B of the Hindu Marriage Act (for short, the Act) they filed a petition in the court also. As a matter of fact. on that date, a Panchayatnanla was recorded between the parties expressing therein that the parties cease to be husband and wife and as a result of the settlement the respondent paid Rs. 2,500/ - to the appellant in lieu of the presents and dowry which, according to the appellant's parents had been given to him at the time of marriage. One significant fact stated in this compromise deed Ex. P1 is that the parties to the litigation were living separately for quite some time past and there was no hope of their reconciliation. Though at the trial, the appellant sought to nullify this compromise deed Ex. P -1 on the ground that the same was the result of fraud and undue influence, yet the trial court has recorded a Finding, to my mind for good reasons, that this was not so; rather, it was the result of free -will of the parties.