LAWS(P&H)-2015-2-669

PUSHPINDER KAUR Vs. THAKUR DASS

Decided On February 05, 2015
PUSHPINDER KAUR Appellant
V/S
THAKUR DASS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellant -wife against the judgment and decree dated 3.12.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge, Panchkula, 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.) SHORN of unnecessary details, the facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 3.12.1999 at village Marranwala, Tehsil Kalka, District Panchkula according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The parties cohabited at village Plankhwala, District Solan (HP) and out of the said wedlock, a male child, namely, Ishant @ Vivek was born on 18.9.2000. When the respondent objected to the appellant to her frequent visits to her parental house, she misbehaved and used defamatory language by levelling false allegations against him and his family members. She also got registered an FIR No. 230 dated 14.9.2003, under Sections 323, 342, 406, 498 -A, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station, Pinjore against the respondent and his family members on the ground of dowry and illicit relationship of the respondent with his sister -in -law. However, they were acquitted by the trial court vide judgment dated 16.4.2010. Thereafter, the appellant filed a petition under Sections 12, 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the respondent which is pending adjudication in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula. She also filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 9.10.2003, wherein the trial court vide order dated 5.8.2004 granted consolidated interim maintenance to her at the rate of Rs. 1000/ - per month and the revision preferred against the said order was also dismissed vide order dated 1.10.2004. The appellant thereafter filed a petition under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nalagarh (HP) and the same was got dismissed in default on 11.5.2005. According to the respondent, the appellant had levelled false allegations regarding demand of dowry and illicit relations which were found to be incorrect. The respondent and his family members remained in police as well as judicial lock up for a considerable period which caused mental and physical cruelty to him. She also deserted the respondent from 13.9.2003 as she was living separately from him without any reasonable cause. Accordingly, the respondent 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 though her father had spent huge amount on her marriage but she was taunted, harassed and humiliated by the respondent and his family members by demanding dowry. It was further pleaded that she trapped the respondent in a compromising position with his sister -in -law (Bhabhi). The respondent asked the appellant to bring a scooter or Rs. 35,000/ - for purchasing the scooter. Even the father of the appellant sent a complaint dated 9.5.2002 to the President, Gram Panchayat, Kajahal for taking action against the respondent and his family members but to no result. In December, 2003, on refusal of the appellant for bringing Rs. 1 lac for starting the business of the respondent when her brother -in -law came to Palankhwala, she was given beatings by the respondent and his family members. However, a compromise was executed between the parties on 20.7.2003 but the behaviour of the respondent did not improve. Even she was given beatings on 12.9.2003 when she refused to sign on blank papers. She was forced to leave the matrimonial home and to lodge the aforesaid FIR against the respondent and his family members. The other averments made in the petition were denied and a prayer for dismissal of the same was made. From the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues: -

(3.) RELIEF .