PROMILA Vs. JASVINDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by dismissal of her petition under section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of her marriage with respondent, the wife (hereinafter referred to as appellant) has filed this appeal challenging impugned judgment dated 22.2.2013 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak.

(2.) The case set up by appellant, in her petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, is that she was married to respondent on 6.12004 but no child was born out of the wedlock. Prior to marriage her parents were told that respondent was M.A. in Public Administration and was working as a General Manager, drawing a salary of ' 25,000/- per month which was incorrect. Though it had been represented that he was a bachelor but later the appellant came to know that the respondent was a divorcee and was shown to have been disowned by his father on 25.8.2004 to avoid legal liabilities. The appellant averred that she resided with respondent for 5 days after marriage upto 11.12004 and returned to her matrimonial home on 14.12004 where she remained up to 3.2005. It is a case of the appellant that during her stay at matrimonial home, her husband, his father, his brother and sister-in-law humiliated and tortured her for having brought less dowry and demanded an amount of ' 5 lakhs. Upon appellant's inability to meet the said demand she used to be beaten mercilessly by them and was ultimately turned out of her matrimonial home on 3.2005. However, after 2 days, she was sent back to her matrimonial home. The respondent and his family continued with their maltreatment and harassment. On 10.2005, the respondent told her that he would not even have any physical relations unless an amount of ' 5 lacs was brought by her. She was not even permitted to enter his room and ultimately on 9.6.2005 she was thrown out of her matrimonial home after having been beaten mercilessly and was told not to return without the amount of ' 5 lakhs. Subsequently, panchayat was convened at the residence of the respondent in the year 2006, 2007 and in the year 2009 but to no avail and thus the appellant was residing at her parental home since then.

(3.) The respondent contested the petition and while denying all the material averments made by the appellant, he alleged that though the appellant had become pregnant after some time of the marriage but she aborted the child due to her arrogant behaviour. The respondents stated therein that he had informed the parents of respondent that his father had disowned him from all his property and he was residing separately due to some family reasons. He further stated that the appellant quarreled with respondent and insulted and humiliated him on account of his unemployment and herself left the company of respondent without his consent or permission and despite his requests to join him back she did not return to her matrimonial home after 2009.