RAJINDER SINGH Vs. KAMALJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having remained unsuccessful in a petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short "the Act") for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce, the appellant-husband has challenged the judgment and decree dated 22.7.2008 passed by the Additional District Judge (A), Fast Track Court, Sangrur by way of instant appeal.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts relevant for adjudication of the present appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 10.5.1997 by Anand Karaj ceremony at village Thalesan. After the marriage, the parties cohabited as husband and wife at village Nangla and from their lions, two children, namely, Ramanpreet Kaur (daughter) and Gurvarinder Singh (son) was born who were residing with the appellant. The parties were residing at village Nangla along with the parents, sisters and brother of the appellant. The sisters of the appellant were married and his brother was residing in Germany with his family. Earlier, the respondent was residing happily with the appellant and his family but she started pressurizing him for separate residence from his parents. On his refusal, the respondent started misbehaving with the appellant and his parents. Even she pressurized the appellant to go abroad. She did not allow the appellant for sexual intercourse though she was residing in his house and had deserted him. She used to visit her parental house without informing the appellant or his parents. In December, 2005, the respondent sprinkled kerosene oil and tried to immolate herself and she was saved by the appellant and his mother. Thereafter, the father of the appellant convened a panchayat and asked the respondent that as to why she tried to immolate herself upon which she stated that the appellant was not ready to go abroad and also was not ready for separate residence from his parents. Accordingly, the appellant 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 respondent by filing a written statement. It was pleaded that in the marriage valuable articles were given and the barat accompanied 100- 125 persons. The parents of the appellant always demanded dowry in the shape of cash. They used to say that if she did not bring Rs. 2 lacs from her father, then they would remarry the appellant with a girl of rich family. The other averments made in the petition were denied and a prayer for dismissal of the same was made. Replication was filed controverting the averments made in the written statement. From the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues:-

(3.) In support of his case, the appellant besides examining himself as PW3 and tendering his affidavit as Ex.PW3/A also examined Darshan Singh as PW1 who tendered his affidavit Ex.PW1/A, Karamjit Singh Sarpanch as PW2 who tendered his affidavit Ex.PW2/A and Chanan Ban as PW4 who tendered his affidavit as Ex.PW4/A. He also tendered certified copies of Farad Maqboojgi as Ex.P1 and FIR as Ex.P2. On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the appellant, the respondent examined herself as RW1 and tendered her affidavit as Ex.RW1/A, Mohinder Singh as RW2 who tendered his affidavit Ex.RW2/A and Mohinder Singh as RW3 who also tendered his affidavit as Ex.RW3/A.