BALRAM SINGH Vs. SMT. SUKHWANT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge. Amritsar, dated August 30,1986, whereby the petition filed on behalf of Balram Singh, Appellant, for divorce was dismissed.

(2.) THE marriage between the parties was solemnised on November 25, 1973, One child was born out of the said wedlock who died subsequently. The wife left the matrimonial home in December, 1977. The petition for divorce was filed on January 28, 1985. According to the case set up by the husband, the wife, from the very beginning insisted upon living separately, but the husband tried to persuade her that it was not possible because he had yet to establish in life. The wife did not agree and put her proposal that the husband should shift to the village of her parents to look after the affairs of her parental family because her mother was widow and the brothers were young. The husband did not agree to this proposal. According to him, it was not possible for him to live separately from his parents being the eldest son in the family. He tried to persuade the wife but her attitude was indifferent She used to pick up quarrels with him and his other family members. The wife used to insult the other family members of his husband. When the matter was brought to the notice of his mother -in -law by the husband, she took the side of her daughter. According to the husband, this conduct on the part of the wife constituted physical and mental cruelty. Ultimately, in December, 1977, the wife was taken away on the pretext that there was some marriage in the family of the wife. After waiting for a fortnight, the husband went to her parents' house and requested her to accompany him to the matrimonial home, but she refused. Not only that, he was insulted by her and her mother. On February 25, 1982 wife filed a criminal complaint under Sections 494 and 120 -B, Indian Penal Code, against her husband Balram Singh and his mother Mohinder Kaur that Balram Singh had contracted second marriage with Yugraj Kaur, during the subsistence of his first marriage with her. The said complaint was ultimately dismissed vide order dated November 28, 1984, Exhibit P 4. In view of this treatment on the part of the wife, the husband filed the petition for divorce against her. In the written statement filed by her, she denied the allegations levelled against her. She pleaded that she was always ready and willing to go to the matrimonial home, but it was the husband who was not interested to keep her. He had filed a suit for judicial separation against her earlier, but the same was dismissed. She many times approached her husband, but he deserted and neglected her without any cause or excuse. She had to file a petition under Section 125, Code of Criminal Procedure, for maintenance which was still pending. She also alleged that the husband had contracted a second marriage with one Yugraj Kaur who was a Staff Nurse and that she had already filed a complaint under Section 494, Indian Penal Code, against her husband and his family members. On the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed the following issues:

(3.) The learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the filing of the criminal complaint, which was ultimately dismissed by the criminal Court vide order, copy, Exhibit P.4, constituted mental cruelty on the part of the wife Not only that, she still persisted that her husband has remarried one Yugraj Kaur, though this plea was found to be false by the criminal Court. Thus, argued the learned Counsel, on the facts admitted, the husband was entitled to the decree of divorce. In support of the contention, the learned Counsel relied upon Rajkishore Prasad v. Raj Kumari Devi, 1986 (2) H.L.R. 36 and Smt Rajinder Kaur Gill v. Prof. Sital Singh, 1983 H.L.R. 219.