JASINDER KAUR Vs. GURBAKSH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The marriage between the parties stand dissolved by the impugned decree of divorce dated 30th March, 1981. It has been granted on the basis of desertion on the part of the appellant.

(2.) The sole submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the trial Court has failed to appreciate 'the evidence properly. I, However, see no merit in this submission of the learned counsel. As per the averments made in the petition, the appellant forsake the company of the respondent-husband on 5th August, 1977, just after less than 'two years of their marriage on 24th December, 1975. On 24th January, 1978, she along with her mother came to the house of the respondent-husband and took away all her valuables on 25th January, 1979, and, thus, disclosing her complete intention to sever all marital ties with him. It is on record that in spite of his best efforts, she failed to return to him. It is again on record that when with a view to effecting reapproachment between the parties he approached- her brother Major Sarao, the latter after some efforts expressed his complete frustration about her behaviour and expressed his helplessness to do anything in the matter. Letters Exs. P.1 to P. 3 written by Major Sarao to the respondent completely support this part of the version of the respondent. The genuineness of these letters is not disputed in any manner. Besides this, it is also on record that the appellant against the express wishes of the respondent, sought admission in an institution at Saharanpur to under-take some sort of Ntirsing Course where she had disguised her marital status as "unmarried". Though the appellant offered some sort of an explanation about this conduct of hers during the course of her statement as R.W. 1, with the plea that she had described herself as unmarried at the instance of the respondent but this explanation sounds preposterous on the face of it. Strange as it may appear, the appellant has not even made a faint suggestion about any misbehaviour or unbecoming conduct of the respondent-husband. There is not even an allegation on her part that the respondent ever misbehaved or ill-treated her. Thus, in the absence of any justifiable reason on the part of the appellant to forsake the company of the respondent and her conduct in taking away all her valuables from his house and getting herself admitted at a distant place against the wishes of the husband and treating or disclosing herself to be an unmarried person fully establishes the two ingredients of desertion, viz., (i) factum of separation; and (ii) animus deserendi, i. e. an intention on the part of the appellant to forsake the company of the respondent. For the reasons recorded above I find no infirmity in the judgment under appeal and, thus, have no hesitation in affirming the same. Thus, this appeal fails and is dismissed but with no order as to costs.