REETIKA GULERIA Vs. YASHVIR SINGH GULERIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant -wife against the judgment and decree dated 21.1.2015 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 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 on 17.2.2009 at Ambala according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The respondent was posted as Divisional Signal and Telecom Engineer in the office of Chief Project Manager, Railway Electrification, Ambala whereas the appellant was M.Sc. Bio Technology and was doing M.Phil./Ph.D. programme in New Delhi. Although the parties lived together as husband and wife but no child was born. As pleaded by the respondent in his petition under section 13 of the Act, the behaviour of the appellant wife from the very inception of the marriage was very cruel. She was non -responsive all the time. After returning from honeymoon on 10.3.2009, both the husband and wife came to Bharuch (Gujarat) where the respondent was posted but the behaviour of the appellant became bad to worse. She used to shout at the respondent as and when he wanted to have a talk with her. She started causing mental harassment and torture to the respondent. She treated the respondent with cruelty and her behaviour was totally indifferent. She stated that she wanted to marry some Army officer and had been forcibly married with the respondent against her wish and consent. According to the respondent, the marriage was simple. No dowry was taken in the marriage. Even the two cheques which were brought by the respondent were returned to her during phera ceremony. The respondent was vegetarian whereas the appellant used to cook non -veg. food despite protest being raised by him. She did not respect the respondent and his parents. During January 2011 when the parents of the respondent visited them at Vadodara, she told the respondent to either send his parents back to their home at Shimla or she would leave the matrimonial home. The respondent did not want to leave Delhi but wanted to enjoy independent life in Delhi. The respondent wrote a letter to the appellant as well as her father on 16.2.2011 but the appellant served the respondent with a legal notice dated 10.3.2011 for initiating legal proceedings. Again a legal notice was served upon him by the appellant on 30.3.2011 claiming maintenance and other expenses. The appellant sought information under the R.T.I. Act from various departments in order to harass and humiliate the parents of the respondent. The respondent had earlier filed a petition for divorce on 17.2.2011 before the District Judge Shimla, which was contested by the appellant. The appellant was paid Rs. 10,000/ - per month as maintenance pendente lite but on the issue of jurisdiction of the divorce petition at Shimla, the said petition was withdrawn on 11.6.2012 with the consent of the parties. She also filed petitions under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Upon notice in Section 13 petition, the appellant appeared and filed written statement controverting the averments made in the petition. The trial court after appreciating the evidence on record allowed the petition filed by the respondent -husband vide impugned judgment and decree dated 21.1.2015. Hence the instant appeal by the appellant wife.

(3.) THE trial court on the pleadings of the parties framed the following issues: - -