GURDIP KAUR Vs. BALBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT-WIFE in this appeal filed by her under clause X of the Letters Patent craves setting-aside of Judgment and order dated April 26, 1990 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in F. A. O. No. 50- M of 1989 confirming the judgment passed by the Matrimonial Court dissolving the marriage of the parties in a petition filed by respondent-Balbir Singh for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. In her endeavour to get the impugned orders reversed, appellant-wife raises a solitary but important question i. e. as to whether it was a case of ordinary wear and tear of the married life of the parties that prompted respondent-husband to plead for divorce by exaggerating and even falsely introducing events or with a view to make out a ground for divorce i. e. cruelty or it was actually a case of mental or physical cruelty as defined under Section 13 (1) (1- A) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Answer to this question obviously lies in the pleadings of the parties and the evidence that has come on record to substantiate particular facts on the basis of which the husband thinks that it shall imperil his sense of personal safety and mental happiness.

(2.) MARRIAGE between the parties was solemnized on October 12, 1983 in ac- cordance with Sikh rites at Jalandhar City. The parties cohabited together as husband and wife for nearly a period of 3-1/2 years. The appellant-wife conceived during this period but unfortunately she gave birth to a still-born child, The husband at the time of marriage was living in House No. B-14/908-A, Arjan Nagar, Jalandhar City with his parents in a joint family. It is his case that the appellant-wife was looked-after properly but only after a month or so of the marriage, she all of a sudden, started putting pressure on him to live separately from his parents. The suggestion was not compatible with the circumstances of the husband and instead of giving flat refusal, he kept postponing the matter with the hope that with the lapse of time the wife may soften or totally give-up her stand of living separately from her in laws. Far from being that, it is the case of the husband, that the appellant-wife become far more vociferous and persisted her demand as noticed above and with a view to achieve the said object, she started insulting him and his parents on triffles. the atmosphere in the house, thus, became surcharged. She even insulted him and his parents by calling them cads, who were trying to live on her earnings. She refused to have food and threatened to commit suicide in case her demand for separate residence was not acceded to. The husband and his family members were, thus, totally up-set. She also developed aversion for the members of the family and refused to take meals prepared by his mother voicing suspicion that the food might be poisoned. Her attitude towards the visiting relatives was also wholly unbecoming and she even stopped getting and wishing them. She refused to do house-hold chores and refused to help her mother-in-law by saying that she was not their maidservant. She threatened to commit suicide thus involving him and his family members in a criminal case. She left the matrimonial home on June 2,1984 against the wishes of the husband and continued living in the house of her parents till July 13,1985. However, on account of sustained efforts on behalf of the husband and his parents, she resumed cohabitation in July, 1985. A year's separation had infact brought no change in her and the moment she joined the matrimonial home, she again started clamouring for having a separate residence. The husband seeing his marriage on rocks conceded to her demand of a separate house when on May 20, 1987 he shifted to a rented house at Jalandhar City in Arjan Nagar itself. For a small period of five months, the parties lived in the separate house, as the wife left once again the matrimonial home a week before October 6,1987 when the husband filed petition for divorce. It is the case of the husband that even in the rented house the appellant-wife insisted upon her husband to stop visiting his parents or to have any sort of connection with them and threatened to immolate herself if he had any social contact with his parents. It is also the case of the husband that she threw house-hold articles on him. She once hurled a CHAPPAL on him during the course of visit of his younger brother. It is on the pleadings, as mentioned above, that the husband sought a decree for divorce on the ground that the attitude and behaviour of the wife was totally callous resulting into untold misery and hardship to him and his parents. The ground of cruelty was, thus, pressed into service so as to seek divorce.

(3.) THE story as put-forth by the husband was stoutly denied by the appellant wife in her written statement. It was pleaded that she loved and respected the family members of her husband and that no demand was made by her for a separate house. The plea was fabricated with a view to create a ground for filing divorce petition. She had never adopted harsh attitude towards her husband or his family members. She never insulted him and his parents and that she had done nothing that might surcharge the atmosphere in the house. She also pleaded that her parents gave dowry worth lac of rupees in the marriage and ever since the day of marriage she had been giving her full salary to her husband. Despite that, the husband and his parents were not satisfied and they started demanding a scooter. On account of insufficient dowry, she was, thus, illtreated. However, with a hope that the marriage between them might survive, she had been tolerating the harassment and maltreatment mated out to her. She further pleaded that she was an educated and civilised lady and belonged to a respectable, noble family and she always treated her husband and his parents with full respect. She denied that she had ever asked her husband and his parents that they were living on her earnings or that she ever refused to have food or that she ever threatened to commit suicide in case her demand for separate residence was not fulfilled. She was even beaten on account of in-sufficient dowry count of mental agony and physical pain, thus, resulting into birth of a premature baby in Mangat Hospital, Jalandhar on June 13,1984, who was already dead. A message was sent to the husband and his parents but none came to see her in that precarious condition. However, when they came to the hospital and were informed regarding the birth of a dead child, they abused her and went away and never visited her again. Her father made strenuous efforts for her rehabilitation in the matrimonial home but the husband and his parents refused to keep her unless the demands made by them were fulfilled. Her brother also made number of attempts and even once took her to her in-laws and left her there on May 29,1985. However, despite the fact that she had given full respect to her husband and his parents, their behaviour towards her did not change and they always hated and neglected her. It is further pleaded by her that she served in the school as well as in the house. She never refused to do house-hold work or to help her mother-in-law in the discharge of daily duties. One of her brothers had gone to United States of America (U. S. A.) and settled there. It had further led to more demands made by her husband and his parents, who insisted upon a scooter and V. C. R. as also some cash. She admits having shifted to the rented house on May 20, 1987 but pleads that none of the dowry articles were given to her for her use. In the circumstances that she was placed, she admits that once she thought of committing suicide. However, she stout- ly denies that she ever threatened to commit suicide with a view to involve her husband and his family members in a criminal case. In paragraph 6 of the written statement she specifically pleaded that she was always willing and is eve now ready and willing to join the society of her husband and to resume cohabitation as a dutiful and obedient wife.