MANJIT KAUR Vs. SUKHWINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is wife's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 2.5.2003 vide which the husband's petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for dissolution of marriage between the parties, has been accepted and a decree of divorce has been passed.

(2.) MARRIAGE between the parties was solemnised in April, 1985 in accordance with Sikh religious rites and ceremonies. The parties lived together at Nawan Shahr and marriage was consummated. Three children, namely, Amandeep Kaur, Sumanpreet Kaur and Opinder Singh were born out of the wed-lock. According to petitioner, hereinafter referred to as the petitioner-husband, relations between the parties remained cordial upto 1987, but thereafter respondent, hereinafter referred to as the appellant-wife, started craving for luxurious life. When petitioner-husband could not meet her demands, she started misbehaving and insulting him in the presence of his friends and relatives, thereby causing harassment to him. In 1989 petitioner-husband went to foreign country in order to earn his livelihood. He came back to India in 1991. During his stay abroad, he had been sending money to the appellant-wife. He, however, came to know that while he was away, the wife stayed out of the matrimonial home for most of the time. During his stay in India from 1992 to 1995, petitioner found that the appellant-wife would leave the matrimonial home without informing him and would stay out of the house for days together. When questioned about her absence, she retorted that petitioner-husband had no business to check her freedom and she threatened to commit suicide in case he did so. On a query made by the petitioner-husband regarding the money sent by him, the appellant-wife got infuriated and levelled various false allegations against him. In the month of February, 1999, appellant-wife left the matrimonial home in the absence of the petitioner, taking away all the jewellery and other articles, but she left behind all the three children. Petitioner-husband convened panchayats to bring her back to matrimonial home, but she refused to resume cohabitation. Accordingly, the petitioner-husband sought divorce on the ground of cruelty and adertion.

(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed :-