SHYAM SUNDER Vs. SAPNA ALIAS SUNITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the last date of hearing, i.e., 30.01.2014, notice was asked to be issued to the appellant without process fee for today. As per office report, notice issued to the appellant has been received back unserved with the report that the appellant is now not residing at the given address.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent is unaware of the address of the appellant. The marriage between the parties was solemnised according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 9.7.2000. The respondent Sapna filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('Act' - for short) seeking dissolution of the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce. It is inter -alia alleged by the respondent that the appellant was married with one Manju Devi. The said marriage between the appellant and Manju Devi was dissolved by a divorce petition. The respondent wife was also earlier married and her marriage was got dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent of the parties on the ground of impotency. The said fact according to the respondent wife was in the knowledge of the appellant husband. The respondent wife in her petition for divorce alleged that the parties lived together as husband and wife but they had no issue from the marriage. After marriage, she was harassed and taunted for bringing inadequate dowry. The respondent also learnt that the appellant used to treat his first wife Manju with cruelty. He used to demand dowry from her.

(3.) THE family members of the appellant - husband ill -treated the respondent -wife saying that they would make her life miserable as they did with the previous wife of the appellant unless their demand for an amount of Rs.1 lac was met. The respondent also alleged other acts of cruelty committed on her. She lodged FIR No.105 dated 12.6.2002 against the appellant and his other family members at Police Station Charkhi Dadri for the offences under Sections 406, 498 -A and 506 Indian Penal Code. It is also alleged by the respondent that the appellant himself filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act. He was directed to pay Rs.2,000/ - per month to the respondent as maintenance pendente -lite but he did not pay the same. With the result, he got his petition dismissed as withdrawn.