LAWS(P&H)-2015-2-185

UMA RANI Vs. SUBODH KUMAR

Decided On February 27, 2015
UMA RANI Appellant
V/S
SUBODH KUMAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant -wife against the judgment and decree dated 3.7.2014 passed by the District Judge, Kurukshetra, whereby the petition filed by the respondent -husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short "the Act") for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce, was allowed.

(2.) SANS unessential, the facts relevant for adjudication of the present appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 24.1.1996 at Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. After the marriage the parties lived together as husband and wife and cohabited as such. Out of the said wedlock, two children, namely, Namarta alias Sikha (daughter) and Raghav (son) were born. According to the averments made in the divorce petition, the behaviour of the appellant was cruel and barbaric towards the respondent and his family members. She on the instigation of her parents, used to maltreat, torture and harass the respondent. In July, 2002, she left the company of the respondent without any rhyme or reason and since then she was living with her parents at Jagadhri. She also filed a complaint under Sections 406, 498 -A, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the respondent and his family members. However, the respondent and his family members were acquitted by the trial court vide judgment dated 10.2.2010 in the complaint filed by the appellant. Thereafter, the respondent had gone to the house of the appellant but she reprimanded him and refused to accompany him to her matrimonial home. The respondent made various efforts to bring the respondent back but to no avail. Accordingly, he filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. The said petition was resisted by the appellant by filing a written statement. Besides raising various preliminary objections, it was pleaded that the respondent himself was wrong doer as he subjected the appellant to cruelty. The respondent and his family members raised demands of money and dowry and used to beat and insult the appellant. In July, 2002, she along with her minor children was turned out of the matrimonial home in three wearing clothes. She filed a criminal complaint against the respondent and his family members. After their acquittal in the criminal complaint, she had filed an appeal which was pending adjudication. The other averments made in the petition were denied and a prayer for dismissal of the same was made. The averments made in the written statement were controverted by the respondent by filing replication. From the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues: -

(3.) RELIEF .