RAVINDER KAUR Vs. RAJ BIRENDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS L. P. A. is directed against the judgment dated 10. 12. 1993 [reported as (1993-3) 105 P. L. R: 442] passed by the learned Single Judge who affirmed the judgment and decree of the Trial Court dated 28. 1. 1988 by which the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the respondent-husband (Dr. Raj Birender Singh) was allowed on the ground of desertion.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that Dr. Raj Birender Singh filed a petition under Section 13 the Hindu Marriage Act against his wife Smt. Ravinder Kaur appellant on the ground of desertion by inter alia pleading that the appellant had deserted him for a continuous period of two years immediately preceding the filing of the petition on 12. 3. 1985. It has been averred by the respondent-husband that parties to the marriage were married at Delhi on 8. 5. 1977 according to the Sikh religious rites and they cohabited together as husband and wife at different places viz. , Ambala Cantt. , Chandigarh, and Delhi but no child was born out of the wedlock. The husband alleged that the marriage was a failure from the very outset as the wife was not inclined for marriage and she adopted a cold attitude towards the husband regarding her matrimonial obligations. He tried his best to keep the appellant wife happy but she could not adjust in the married life. The husband alleged that his wife remained most of the time at her parent's house and used to stay with him for short spells only. Her, attitude was also insulting and humiliating towards his parents. She used to create scene in order to humiliate the husband and his family. She was suffering from tumour in the uterus and was got operated from Doctor Devi at Deep Nursing Home, Chandigarh. Thereafter she called her father and he came to Chandigarh and gave threats to the husband to the effect that he would not allow his daughter (appellant herein)to reside with the respondent-husband and also lodged report with the police which ended in a compromise. Finally the father of the appellant took her to Delhi on 16. 9. 1982 alongwith her articles of dowry etc. The appellant-wife left the house of the respondent-husband against his wishes. Thereafter, the appellant never visited the house of the respondent. This desertion on the part of the wife was intentional. The husband earlier filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the Court of District Judge Ambala, on the ground of cruelty but that petition was got dismissed being not pressed as by then the period of two years had not elapsed. It was also maintained that in the proceedings under Section 125 of the Code 6f Criminal Procedure, instituted by the wife before the Metropolitan Magistrate at Delhi she was awarded maintenance allowance.

(3.) A rejoinder was filed to the written statement on behalf of the husband in which he reiterated his allegations made in the petition by denying those of the written statement.