SUKHBIR SINGH Vs. MANDEEP KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide this common judgment, we propose to decide FAO No.M-88 of 2010 titled as Sukhbir Singh v. Mandeep Kaur and FAO No.M-89 of 2010 titled as Sukhbir Singh v. Mandeep Kaur. FAO No.M-88 of 2010 has arisen out of judgment dated 13.10.2009 passed by the trial Court in a petition under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by Mandeep Kaur whereas FAO No.M-89 of 2010 has arisen out of judgment dated 13.10.2009 passed by the trial Court in a petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by Sukhbir Singh. Since the controversy is inter-se between the same parties, facts are being culled out from FAO No.M-88 of 2010.

(2.) Mandeep Kaur filed petition under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for declaring the marriage between the parties as nullity. She pleaded that the marriage of respondent (Mandeep Kaur) was solemnized with the appellant (Sukhbir Singh) on 07.07.2004 by way of Anand Karaj Ceremony. They lived together as husband and wife and out of this wedlock, one son Karanpreet Singh took birth who was residing with the respondent at the time of filing of the petition. Mandeep Kaur came to know that Sukhbir Singh was already married with one Kuldeep Kaur daughter of Gian Singh resident of village Bilga and had not obtained any divorce from her earlier wife through process of the Court. She alleged that soon after the marriage, Sukhbir Singh and his family members started raising demands of dowry and maltreating her. She was given beatings and they demanded Rs. 20,000/- from her parents, despite showing incapacity of her parents to fulfil the demand, there was no change in the behaviour of the husband and his family. She kept on tolerating the behaviour with a hope that better sense would prevail upon him at any time but she was turned out from the house on July, 2010 after giving merciless beatings. Mandeep Kaur also alleged that she was living with her parents at Village Dharamkot and was entitled to decree of nullity of marriage and divorce on the ground of cruelty and concealment of first marriage. She also filed an application under Section 125 as well as criminal complaint in the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Moga.

(3.) On notice, Sukhbir Singh contested the petition and alleged that Mandeep Kaur cannot be allowed to take advantage of her own wrong. She herself left the society of the husband without any rhyme or reason. Panchayats were convened but she refused to return to matrimonial home. Sukhbir Singh also filed petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. He alleged that Mandeep Kaur was duly informed about his earlier marriage and dissolution thereof by mutual consent and compromise which was duly reduced into writing in the presence of Panchayat according to custom of divorce existed amongst Jat Sikhs. After the marriage both live happily for a period of one year and she gave birth to two children one male child and one female child. Unfortunately, the female child could not survive after the birth. Appellant husband had suffered injuries in the accident and was bed ridden. In such like situation, Mandeep Kaur left the society of Sukhbir Singh and the minor child. Many a time Panchayat was convened to bring her back in the matrimonial home but she refused on every occasion. Mandeep Kaur did not care for the minor child and Sukhbir Singh brought up the child. He further pleaded that on the request of Mandeep Kaur, he had taken a house on rent at Dharamkot and she started doing job in Batra Nursing Home and thereafter, she started coming late at night and used to leave the house at night time. She insulted and ill treated the husband in the presence of friends and relatives. She did not change her attitude, even her boss was a frequent visitor in the house during night hours. Sukhbir Singh further claimed that actual date of marriage was 07.08.2004 instead of 07.07.2004. By refuting all the allegations, he sought dismissal of the petition under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act.