KAMLESH Vs. SEWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is by the wife directed against the judgment of learned District Judge, Karnal, dismissing her petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce.

(2.) APPELLANT was married to respondent at Karnal on 10.2.1981 according to Hindu rites. It is the case of the appellant that after marriage, she stayed at the house of respondent for two days as is customary in the community and went back to her parents' house and then the Muklawa ceremony took place after five years. Thereafter, she came to the house of respondent and stayed as his wife. One female child, namely, Rekha was born out of the wed-lock. It is further her case that during her stay with the respondent, the respondent used to maltreat and misbehave with her. Immediately after the marriage, he started complaining that dowry brought by her is less than his and his family's expectations. He demanded Rs. 5,000.00 in cash, but when she has told that her parents are poor, he started maltreating her. When she brought this fact to the notice of her parents, they had no other alternative but to give Rs. 2,000.00 to the respondent. Respondent was not satisfied even on receipt of Rs. 2,000.00 and he again demanded money and articles from her parents. She alleged that respondent after giving severe beating turned her out of the house in May, 1987 with the threat that if she dared to come again, she would be done to death. She in her petition has stated that the acts of the respondent have caused reasonable apprehension in her mind that it would be harmful and injurious for her to live with the respondent under the same roof. The respondent in his written statement has not only denied the averments made in the petition, but stated that it is the appellant who left the house with the pretext that she had to attend the marriage of daughter of her maternal uncle in Village Habatpur, but she did not turn up to the house thereafter inspite of repeated requests and persuasions by him and his other relations. He has stated that her father wants to send her with some other person and for that he is to take Rs. 10,000.00 from that person. He has denied that he ever demanded any dowry in cash or in kind, nor anything in cash and kind was given to him at the time of marriage. It is also his case that he is handicapped by one leg and during his stay with her, appellant had been cursing him why she had been married with a man with one leg.

(3.) TRIAL Court on the basis of pleadings and evidence on record dismissed the petition on finding that the appellant has failed to prove that behaviour of her husband was cruel so as to endanger her life, limb or health. Trial Court also found that appellant has failed to lead any corroborative evidence to her allegations of cruelty. It further found that as compared to appellant's evidence, the evidence led by the respondent is more convincing and worthy of credence.