NARESH KUMAR Vs. SARABJIT KAUR ALIAS VANDANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is husband's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 23-10-2003 passed by Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, vide which his petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') has been dismissed.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are that appellant- husband Naresh Kumar filed a petition for divorce under Seqtion 13 of the Act on the ground of cruelty. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 18-1-2000 at Tehsil Malerkotla according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The parties lived and cohabited together at Ludhiana and a son was born out of the wedlock on 10-12-2000. According to husband, the respondent-wife had always been insisting that property be transferred in her name and her brother Inderjit be allowed to live in the matrimonial home. Since the husband did not agree to the proposal of the respondent-wife, she started quarreling even over petty matters. She refused to discharge the matrimonial duties. She made the husband's life a hell and treated him with cruelty. All the efforts made by the husband to persuade the wife failed. Ultimately, on 8-8-2006 the respondent-wife left the matrimonial home along with costly clothes and ornaments. The husband further pleaded that he also convened Panchayat, but the wife refused to join him.

(3.) The divorce petition was contested by the wife. She pleaded that all the allegations made against her are false and frivolous. According to her, the husband and his family members are greedy persons. They asked the respondent's father to give cash in lieu of the dowry articles which were not of good quality, though her father had paid a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- in cash to the husband at the time of marriage. On wife's showing her inability to bring more money, the attitude of the husband became aggressive. It was further stated that husband and his family members used to misbehave with her and they further made demand of Rs. 50,000/-. When her father expressed his inability to meet the demand of the husband, she was turned out of the matrimonial home. The respondent-wife further pleaded that her father had convened Panchayats in June 2001 to rehabilitate her in the matrimonial home, but the husband refused to compromise the matter.