AMARJIT KAUR Vs. PARAMJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS fist appeal from order filed by Smt. Amarjit Kaur (the petitioner -appellant), who is the wife of Paramjit Singh respondent, arises out of the judgment dated 13 -9 -1985 of the learned District Judge, Patiala, whereby he dismissed her petition under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (herinafter called the Act') for grant of a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. The grounds on which divorce was sought is that the respondent had been making false allegations against her and her parents which are enumerated below : -

(2.) ON the basis of the evidence, which I have also gone through, the learned District Judge rightly concluded that the common case of the parties that emerged therefrom is that according to the respondent the appellant has been remarried to one Nana of village Khanauri. Na substantial ground could be made out to challenge the conclusion of the learned District Judge that the first three grounds above do not constitute cruelty, Now, coming to the last ground, all that the appellant has alleged is that the respondent filed a petition before the Judicial Magistrate under section 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and obtained warrants for her Search. She appeared before the Magistrate in response to the warrants. The respondent alleged that the appellant had been remarried to one Nana and he filed a complaint under sections 494/498, Indian Penal Cede, which is still pending adjudication before a Court of competent jurisdiction. The appellant no doubt denies her marriage but this matter will be gone into during the trial of the aforesaid complaint. The appellant, however, has neither made any averment nor has adduced any evidence much less her own statement that the said complaint or the allegations contained therein had caused reasonable apprehension in her mind that it would be harmful or injurious for her to live with the respondent. In the absence of the pleadings and the proof in this respect, it cannot be said that the filing of the complaint by the respondent under sections 494/498, Indian Penal Code, amounts to cruelty within the meaning of section 13 of the Act.

(3.) THE respondent on the other hand has led evidence on the record so as to establish that the appellant has entered into a second marriage with one Nana. It was, however, not considered necessary by the learned District Judge to decide this question, nor do I find any need for doing so. Since, however, the respondent is convinced that the appellant has contracted a second marriage and has in fact filed a complaint under sections 494/498, Indian Penal Code, which is pending adjudication, it is needless to say that such allegation in the complaint which is sub judice does not amount to cruelty.