BALJIT KAUR Vs. RACHHPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first appeal by the wife is directed against the judgment of the Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, whereby petition Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by her husband has been allowed and in consequence thereof, decree has been passed dissolving the marriage.

(2.) The marriage between the parties was solemnised on 7.11.1990 at village Lachowal, District Hoshiarpur according to sikh rites. Respondent-husband Filed petition for divorce on 13.8.1993 on the ground that the appellant has treated him with cruelty and also on the ground that she has deserted him without any just and reasonable cause for more than two years preceding the presentation of the petition. On notice, petition was contested by the appellant. She controverted the allegations made in the petition and pleaded that after the marriage, her mother-in-law and sister-in-law maltreated her and used to taunt that her parents had not given sufficient dowry in accordance with their expectations. She also alleged that her husband is addicted to bad habit of taking liquor and as and when she objected to it, she used to be beaten up. She gave birth to a male child on 3.10.1991, but neither the petitioner nor any one from her in-laws visited her. She submitted that respondent himself is guilty of desertion without any sufficient cause and has never cared to send her or the minor child any amount of maintenance. The parties were afforded opportunity to lead evidence in support of their claim. On consideration of the evidence brought on record, the trial Court decided the issue in regard to appellant treating the respondent with cruelty, against the respondent-husband. However, issue No. 3, namely, respondent has deserted the petitioner without reasonable and just ground, was decided against the appellant and in consequence thereof the trial Court allowed the petition and granted divorce to the respondent. This first appeal is by the wife.

(3.) It has been contended by the counsel for the appellant that the conclusion drawn by the trial Court while deciding issue No. 3 as a result of non-consideration of importance piece of evidence and contradictions brought in the evidence of PWs during cross-examination. Against this, counsel for the respondent has contended that the appellant had deserted the respondent without any reasonable cause and had made no efforts to join the matrimonial home and therefore, the trial Court has rightly dissolved the marriage on the ground of desertion.