KAMAL YADAV Vs. RAJINDER SINGH YADAV

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) UNCONTROVERTED facts are that on 9. 3. 1972 respondent Rajinder Singh and appellant Kamal Yadav were married according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at village Shakurpur. After the marriage, they lived together at Gurgaon and other places till 12. 5. 1983. In this wedlock the appellant gave birth to a son on 24. 8. 1974 and to a daughter of 13. 8. 1980. Both these children are residing with the appellant at her parental home. The appellant filed a petition under Section 125 Cr. P. C. on 15. 6. 1983 which was decided on 20. 5. 1988 whereby the respondent was ordered to pay Rs. 1,000/- per month as maintenance to the appellant and to her children. On 12. 5. 1988 the respondent filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act.

(3.) THE appellant in her reply raised preliminary objections that the petition is not maintainable in view of Section 23 (1) (d) on account of improper delay. The respondent is guilty of intentional desertion, neglect and cruelty. The petition is characterised as false, frivolous and vexatious. Since she has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr. P. C. as a counter-blast, he has filed this petition for restitution of conjugal rights. The respondent was ordered to pay Rs. 1,000/- as maintenance to her and her children. She asserted that she never insulted and abused the respondent or his family members and never asked him to leave his joint family. Even her parents and brothers never asked the respondent to live separately. They never threatened him to kill. She has specifically denied that the respondent's brother, sister, cousin or other relations came to her parental home to take her. It is also denied that on 12. 5. 1983 she left the matrimonial home in his absence and took away all her ornaments and clothings. She has averred that the respondent and his family members were not happy with the dowry given to her at the time of marriage. They asked her to bring valuable articles, two-in-one, jewellery and cash. As her parents were unable to satisfy their lust for more dowry articles, the respondent started maltreating her. He used to burn on her breast and cheeks with cigarette ends. During her pregnancy, she was made to stand throughout the night. She was also threatened to death. The respondent used to beat her off and on. She made a complaint about his behaviour to her parents and relatives who tried to persuade the respondent to behave properly. On 12. 5. 1983, the respondent beat her severely and turned her out alongwith her children from his house. went to her parental home. Since then the respondent never bothered to about their welfare and refused to maintain them. Thus he has intentionally her to withdraw from his society. She filed a petition under Section 125 Cr. P. C. on 15. 6. 1983 which was decided on 20. 5. 1988 and the respondent is ordered pay Rs. 1,000/-per month as maintenance but till 31. 8. 1988 he has not paid sir paise as maintenance which has been accumulated to the tune of Rs. 62,000/ -. Thus according to her, the respondent is guilty of desertion and cruelty.