SWETA Vs. YOGESH KHURANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant -wife against the judgment and decree dated 15.11.2014 passed by the trial court whereby the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short, "the Act") filed by the respondent -husband for dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion 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 on 19.4.2009 at Karnal. After the solemnization of marriage, both the parties lived together as husband and wife but no child was born. As alleged in the petition under section 13 of the Act filed by the respondent -husband, the behaviour and attitude of the appellant -wife from the very beginning was unbearable as she used to insult the respondent on one pretext or the other and pick up quarrel even on petty matters. She used to threat the respondent and his family members that she would leave the matrimonial home and visit her parental house without any intimation to the respondent or his family members. The respondent was pressurized to leave his house and settle in her parental home and on being refused by the respondent, threats were given to him that she would involve the respondent as well as members of his family in false criminal cases. In December 2009, she left the matrimonial home and went to her parental house. Inspite of efforts made by the respondent to bring her back, she did not return. The respondent filed petition under Section 9 of the Act for restitution of conjugal rights and the matter was sent to Mediation centre twice for amicable settlement but she did not agree to come back. Ultimately, the said petition was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 29.3.2012. She also filed a criminal case under sections 323, 406, 498A and 506 read with section 34 IPC against the respondent and his mother. Upon notice in Section 13 petition, 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 filed by the respondent -husband vide impugned judgment and decree dated 15.11.2014. Hence the instant appeal by the appellant -wife.

(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the appellant -wife and perused the record. The trial court on the pleadings of the parties framed the following issues: -