LAWS(P&H)-2015-2-622

GINNI Vs. VIKAS MEHRA

Decided On February 11, 2015
Ginni Appellant
V/S
Vikas Mehra Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of instant appeal, the appellant -wife has challenged the judgment and decree dated 14.11.2014 passed by the Additional District Judge, Amritsar, whereby the petition filed by the respondenthusband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short "the Act") for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty, was allowed.

(2.) A few facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The husband -respondent filed the divorce petition, inter alia, pleading that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 17.10.2010 as her Hindu rites at Amritsar. After the marriage, the parties lived together as husband and wife at Amritsar and consummated the marriage. The respondent noticed that the appellant takes some tables not covered in any wrapper. However, he could not know as to which medicine she was taking without his knowledge and for what purpose. She became pregnant but there was miscarriage in April, 2011. On taking her to the doctor, the respondent and his parents came to know about some mental ailment of the appellant. After miscarriage, the appellant could not take the medicines which she used to take earlier as she was under the care of her mother -in -law. Due to that, her behaviour became violent. When the doctor was consulted, he pointed out that she might be using some medicines relating to mental disorder and prescribed brain mapping test to which she refused and even threatened to kill herself, if she was compelled for the test. She used to lock herself in bathroom/kitchen for hours together and used to say that she would kill herself or other members of the family. She used to move out of the house at midnight by opening doors while other members were sleeping and she had to be brought back with difficulty. Later on, the parents of the appellant disclosed that she was suffering from acute mental disorder and was under medication since childhood and that disorder was not curable. She in the presence of her parents threatened to kill Mrs. Rohni, bhabi of the respondent with knife. She also used to threaten the respondent and his family members that she would commit suicide and would involve them in criminal case. The parents of the respondent made a request to the presents of the appellant that they want divorce but they made a request that they have marriage of their younger daughter on 4.12.2011 and they have taken opinion of doctor who had confirmed that she could not be cured and as such she would not spoil life of the respondent. However, her parents agreed that in case of any criminal act of respondent, the appellant and his family members would not be responsible. The agreement was reduced into writing in this regard. She was living in her parental house since 30.10.2011 and the marriage was not consummated since then. Even she had not allowed sexual intercourse to the respondent since the day of miscarriage. In this way, the appellant and his family members were undergoing mental torture at the hands of the appellant. Unfortunately, in January, 2012, the father of the appellant died and the matter of divorce could not be finalized. Thereafter, the father of the respondent approached the mother of the appellant who sought some time but thereafter she did not reply. The mother of the respondent along with 2 - 3 persons was threatening the respondent to involve him and his family members in false criminal cases. In September, 2012, the appellant and his family members received telephonic call from Mahila Wing regarding complaint filed by the appellant on 5.9.2012 and they appeared before them. However, the appellant withdrew the said complaint on 20.2.2013.

(3.) IN support of his case, the respondent besides examining himself as PW4 also examined Anil Mehra as PW1, HC Ashok Kumar as PW2, Dr. Ajit Inder Singh Bhatia as PW3, Dr. Gurpreet Inder Singh as PW5, Ashok Mehra as PW6 and Dr. Madhu Arora as PW7. On the other hand, the appellant examined her uncle Baldev Raj as RW1 who tendered his affidavit Ex.RW1/A.