SUSHEEL KUMARI Vs. VIJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS F.A.O. is directed against the judgment and decree dated 7.3.1996 passed by the District Judge, Karnal, dissolving marriage of parties under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short "the Act") on the ground of cruelty. About the pleaded second ground of divorce viz. desertion, the court held that as the petition was presented by the husband- respondent in March, 1992 i.e. barely six months after the wife-appellant left the marital home on 15.9.1991, this ground was not available to him.

(2.) THE case of the respondent herein, as set up in the divorce petition, was that marriage between the parties was solemnised on 15.11.1984 at Rohtak according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. After marriage, the appellant joined the respondent at his matrimonial house, at Karnal. Three children, Sunny, Sapna and Jimmy were born out of the wedlock. The behaviour and attitude of the appellant, from the very beginning, was harsh and cruel towards the respondent and his parents. She was disobedient to all to them and used to pick up quarrels with the respondent and his mother on trivial matters. She is a person of short temperament and used to create nuisance and lose her balance of mind on trivial matters. The respondent tried his best to persuade her to mend herself but to no effect. She could not adjust herself in the joint family and used to press the respondent to live separately from his parents. With a view to pressurise the respondent and cause mental tension to him, she went to her parents place, at Rohtak, 6-7 times, without his permission and consent. Ultimately, he separated from the joint family in the year 1987, against his conscious, in the hope that it might satisfy her. But, inspite of that, no change occurred in her behaviour and attitude. She, instead, became more cruel towards him and their children. Several times, she would go and stay at her parents house at Rohtak, leaving children behind. She also started pressurising the respondent to either shift to Delhi for doing business with her brother or to settle at Rohtak, As he refused to do so, she created a very unhealthy atmosphere in the family. He tried his level best to persuade her to live a happy life, with him but to no use. Ultimately, on 17.8.1990, he filed a petition for judicial separation. She appeared in court and put forward demand of having separate living from his parents, in separate premises. He bowed before her wish and agreed for a separate living from his parents, in separate premises, for the sake of children and in order to lead a peaceful married life. He, then, withdrew his petition for judicial separation on 1.12.1990 and took the appellant back to her matrimonial house at Karnal. After 10-12 days, he took a house on rent, in the area of Moti Nagar, Karnal. He and the appellant shifted to that house, with bag and baggage. Parties lived peacefully for a few days. But, thereafter, the appellant started doubting the character of the respondent. The latter, who deals in vegetables, had been visiting Delhi for purchase of vegetables at cheaper rates. Some times, due to train-timings, he would reach back late in the evening. Due to this, she started doubting his character. She would also restrain him from visiting or meeting his relatives at Delhi. For some days, he took the matter lightly but later on, felt that day by day, the situation was deteriorating. She even stopped providing food to him whenever he would come late. She stopped having sexual relations with him. She pressurised him to either shift to Rohtak or Delhi where he would remain under her constant check and also of her brother. She also started proclaiming that he had been taking liquor and gambling. She would abuse him and his family in filthy language, in the presence of his landlord and other neighbours. On many occasions even the landlord of the house had tried to dissuade her from doing so.

(3.) THE appellant (respondent before trial court) controverted all the allegations and pleaded that, in fact, the respondent wanted her to persuade her brothers to associate him in their factory at Delhi, and when she refused to talk to her brothers in this regard, he gave merciless beating to her. He also used to come home late in drunken condition and beat/maltreat her. He had been taunting her for having brought less dowry. He was a habitual drunkard and gambler and had even denied the basic necessities of life to her. When he beat her in September, 1991, she called her brother and left the matrimonial house, in his company.