SUNIL KUMAR Vs. SHASHI BALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is husband's appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act (in short the 'Act').

(2.) THE appellant -petitioner filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act for a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. He pleaded that he was married with the respondent on 1.5.1990 at Bathinda according to Hindu rites, She lived with him for one month. There is no issue out of this wedlock. She has deserted him for more than 2 years prior to the filing of this petition. Thus she has deprived him of the pleasures of married life. Her behaviour was not good towards him. She used to neglect him and always insulted him which caused physical and mental torture to him. She used to threaten him to a flame herself. She used to abuse him in filthy language. He has not condoned the above acts of cruelty. Thrice, he tried to bring her back but she declined. She filed false petitions with the police and got him and his relations detained by them. Hence on these counts, he prayed for a decree of divorce.

(3.) THE appellant's learned counsel contended that the respondent did not file any written statement to controvert the appellant's allegations. Further, the evidence adduced by the appellant is unrebutted but still the trial Court has not believed his evidence and has dismissed his petition. He took me through the evidence and pointed out that the husband has clearly stated that he cannot say anything about her behaviour but she was not respecting his relations. She was not doing any work when asked to do. She lived with him only for about 1 -1/4 months. Thereafter, she left the matrimonial home without his consent. Thrice he made attempts to bring her back but she refused to come back. His statement is duly corroborated by Jhanda Singh, AW2, Sanjay Chhiber, AYV3 and Harnam Singh, AW4. There are minor discrepancies in their statements but from the tenor of their statements, it is evident that they are cogent and reliable witnesses. Thus the petitioners/appellant has proved that she has deserted him without any reasonable cause or excuse and has failed to come back to the matrimonial home despite attempt made by him. This proves not only the fact of desertion but also animus deserendi.