JUGRAJ SINGH Vs. SUKHPARAMJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 9.9.2013 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ludhiana whereby the petition filed by him under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short "the Act") for restitution of conjugal rights has been dismissed, the appellant -husband has approached this Court by way of instant appeal.

(2.) SHORN of unnecessary details, the facts relevant for the disposal of the instant appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The marriage of the parties was solemnized in the year 2000 at Khanna as per Sikh rites and ceremonies. After the marriage, both the parties lived together as husband and wife and cohabited as such at Ludhiana and out of the said wedlock, a daughter, namely, Jatinder Kaur @ Dupinder Kaur and a son Kabir were born. It was a simple marriage and nothing was given to the appellant and his family members at the time of marriage. After a few days of the marriage, the behaviour of the respondent became rude and she started picking up quarrel on petty matters. She pressurized the appellant to live separate from his parents and to shift at Khanna to live as Ghar Jawai but the appellant did not agree. On 27.8.2007, she left the matrimonial home on the occasion of Raksha Bandan. At that time, she took away all the ornaments, valuable clothes and cash amount of Rs. 10,000/ -. Thereafter, the appellant went to her parental house to bring her back but she did not turn and rather insisted him to shift at Khanna. The appellant along with his father again went to the parental house of the respondent to take her back but they insulted the appellant and his father. The appellant convened several panchayats to bring the respondent back but to no avail. In this way, the respondent had left the society of the appellant without any reasonable or sufficient cause. Accordingly, the appellant filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act for restitution of conjugal rights. The said petition was resisted by the respondent by filing a written statement. Besides raising various preliminary objections, it was pleaded that the petition was filed with an oblique motive to create evidence in his favour. The appellant had levelled false and baseless allegations against the respondent. In fact, the respondent was victim of the atrocities committed by the appellant. After sometime of the marriage, the appellant and his family members started maltreating, misbehaving and taunting the respondent for bringing less dowry. Even the appellant started demanding cash to the tune of lacs of rupees and on her refusal, the respondent was given severe beatings and was misbehaved and maltreated. However, the parents of the respondent gave a sum of Rs. 1 lac to the appellant in November, 2003 after the marriage of her brother and again in December, 2004, paid Rs. 50,000/ -. Thereafter, the appellant again started demanding Rs. 50,000/ - to which the respondent and her parents showed their inability. On this, the behaviour of the appellant became bad to worse towards her and she was given beating by him. However, the parents of the respondent gave an amount of Rs. 50,000/ - to the appellant with a hope that better sense would prevail but nothing was changed. The appellant again demanded a car or cash amount to purchase a car. On showing her inability, the respondent along with her minor children was turned out of the matrimonial home on 27.8.2007 after giving severe beatings. Since then, she along with her minor children was residing in her parental house. All the istridhan was lying in the house of the appellant. In the first week of September, 2007, the parents of the respondent convened a panchayat and requested the appellant to keep and maintain her and her minor children but the appellant did not pay any heed to their request. Thereafter, the respondent filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was pending adjudication. 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.) IN support of his case, the appellant appeared as PW2 and examined his father Gurcharan Singh as PW1 who tendered his affidavit Ex.PW1/A and documents Ex.PW1/A and PW1/B. The appellant also tendered his affidavit as Ex.PW2/A and various documents as Ex.PW2/1 to Ex.PW2/11. He also examined his mother Charan Kaur as PW3 who also tendered affidavit Ex.PW3/A and documents as Ex.PW1/1 to Ex.PW1/7. To rebut the evidence of the appellant, the respondent examined herself as DW1 and tendered her affidavit as Ex.DA and also examined her mother Rachppal Kaur as DW2 who tendered her affidavit as Ex.DB and her uncle Joginder Singh as DW3 who tendered his affidavit as Ex.DC.