KULDIP KAUR Vs. PREM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by Smt. Kuldip Kaur against the judgment and decree of the District Judge, Chandigarh dated 13th October, 1984, by which the petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce has been granted against her. Briefly the facts are that the parties were married on 9th March, 1980, according to Hindu rites at Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur. The petitioner was posted as a clerk in the Punjab and Sind Bank at Samaria at that time whereas the respondent was posted as Teacher in Government Girls School, Sector 21, Chandigarh. He was transferred to Chandigarh in October, 1980. Thereafter they started residing in House No. 3375, Sector 23-D, Chandigarh. It is averred by the petitioner that the respondent was of an unaccommodating nature and was not willing to do domestic work. He, therefore, had to cook meals to avoid confrontation. A son was born to the respondent out of the wedlock on 25th August, 1981. The petitioner called his mother for looking after the child but the respondent started misbehaving and picking up quarrels with her on one excuse or other.

(2.) On 20th February, 1982 the respondent left his house and went to her brother's house who was residing in Sector 20, Chandigarh and started living there. He tried his level best to make approachment on many occasions but the respondent did not respond to his gesture. On 4th January, 1984, he took a Panchayat to the father of the respondent at Bhawanigarh. The latter agreed to send the respondent to him after the return of his son from Baghdad but he did not do so. On 2nd March, 1984, he went to see the respondent in her school but she refused to talk and told him that she was not ready to live with him. Thereafter his father wrote a letter to her father on 2nd March, 1984 but to no avail. The petitioner took another Panchayat to her father at Bhawanigarh on 8th March, 1984. The respondent's father did not entertain them and, therefore, no compromise could be arrived at between the parties. Consequently he filed a petition for decree of divorce by dissolution of marriage.

(3.) The respondent controverted the allegations of the petitioner and inter alia pleaded that she was compelled to leave the house of the petitioner and consequently she had no alternative except to go to her brother's house. The petitioner and his parents were not satisfied with the dowry given by her parents and, therefore, they started molesting her. Subsequently she was turned out of the house by him. She also pleaded that she was treated by the petitioner with cruelty. It is alleged that she never deserted him and was ready and willing to come and live with him. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed: