POONAM Vs. RAMESH KUMAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellant - wife against the judgment and decree dated 18.3.2014 passed by the trial court, 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 on the ground of cruelty has been allowed.

(2.) A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as available on the record may be noticed. Marriage between the parties was solemnized in the month of March 1991 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies at Amritsar. After the marriage, the parties lived together and cohabited as husband and wife at Ludhiana and out of the wedlock, two children i.e. one daughter namely Ruchika and one boy Rajat were born. Both the children are at present residing with the respondent. The respondent is handicapped and is serving as Science teacher with Government High Court, Salem Tabri, Ludhiana. From the very beginning, the behaviour of the appellant with the respondent and his parents was very rude. She always used to pressurize the respondent to live separately. She used to insult the respondent in the presence of his friends and relatives being handicapped. She used to make wild and reckless allegations against the character of the respondent. In July 2002, old parents of the respondent were thrown out of the house by the appellant. She made the life of the respondent a hell. Thereafter, the respondent came to know from some reliable sources that the appellant was in illicit relations with one Manjit Lal. Even the wife of the said Manjit Lal had left his society because her husband was living in adultery with the appellant. Panchayati compromise was also effected between the parties. Since 28.6.2009, the appellant is living separately from the respondent. Ultimately, the respondent filed petition under Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of the marriage. Upon notice, the appellant appeared and filed written statement controverting the averments made in the petition. The trial court after examining the entire evidence on record allowed the petition under section 13 of the Act filed by the respondent vide judgment and decree dated 18.3.2014 impugned herein. Hence the instant appeal by the appellant wife.

(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues: