SURINDER PAL SINGH Vs. MANDEEP KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant -husband has filed this appeal to challenge judgment and decree dated 26.3.2003, passed by Additional District Judge, Sangrur, dismissing his petition for grant of a decree of divorce.

(2.) The appellant prayed for grant of a decree of divorce on the grounds of desertion and cruelty. The trial court dismissed the petition for want of any cogent evidence to prove the allegations of cruelty or desertion.

(3.) Counsel for the appellant contends that findings recorded by court below are illegal and arbitrary as material evidence adduced by the appellant has been rejected on the singular deposition of the respondent. The respondent was previously married to Gurchain Singh, the elder brother of the appellant. After the latter's unfortunate demise, the appellant and the respondent got married as both families decided that interest of the three minor children of his brother would be protected if the appellant and respondent got married. The behaviour of the respondent was, however, insensitive towards the appellant and even towards her first husband. The respondent did not change her behaviour and treated the appellant as if he was still the younger brother of her late husband. The respondent did not care for the appellant and his old parents and did not look after them. On the occasion of the Bhog ceremony of his father, the respondent demanded the share of her first husband's property and raised hue and cry. The conduct of the respondent was cruel but the appellant still agreed to give her the share demanded vide, writing dated 27.7.1997. After getting her share, the respondent sold of the land thereby deceiving the appellant. The respondent filed an application, on 31.1.1996, at Police Station Sherpur and at Mahila Cell, Barnala, where a compromise was effected with parties' agreeing to part ways and get remarried. The respondent also registered a false FIR No. 127 dated 8.5.2001 under Ss. 406/498 -A of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Kotwali, Barnala. The appellant was convicted by the trial court but has been acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala on 29.11.2008 by holding that allegations levelled by the respondent are false. The Additional Sessions Judge has held that articles recovered during investigation are mere household articles and were not identified as having been given at the time of marriage as dowry. The Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala, has also relied upon a compromise, Ex.D1, recording the share demanded and given to Mandeep Kaur @ Bimla Rani. Counsel for the appellant has placed on record the copy of judgment, dated 29.11.2008, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala, acquitting the appellant of charges under Ss. 406/498 -A of the Indian Penal Code and urges that the acquittal of the appellant entitles the appellant to grant a decree of divorce on the ground of levelling false allegations that amount to cruelty. In support of his arguments, counsel for the appellant relies upon the following judgments: - Pushpinder Kaur versus Thakur Dass,, 2015(7) R.C.R. (Civil) 893, Imlesh versus Amit, : 2014 AIR (Punjab) 89; Sushma Taya versus Arvind, : 2015(2) R.C.R,.(Civil) 888; K.Srinivas versus K.Sunita, Civil Appeal No. 1213 of 2006 decided on 19.11.2014; K.Srinivas Rao versus D.A. Deepa, : 2013 (2)R.C.R. (Civil) 232; Harjit Kaur versus Pawan Verma,, 2011(8) R.C.R.(Criminal) 83; Bhupinder Kumar son of Shri Desh Raj versus Smt. Versha Rani wife of Bhupinder Kumar, : 2005 (2) PLR, 199, Durga Prasanna Tripathy versus Arundhati Tripathy, Civil Appeal No. 5184 of 2005, decided on 23.8.2005 and Naveen Kohli versus Neelu Kohli, : 2006(2) R.C.R. (Civil) 290.