NEHA GUPTA Vs. SHIV KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by appellant Neha Gupta wife of respondent Shiv Kumar against the judgment and decree dated January 13, 2016 allowing the divorce petition of the respondent on the ground of desertion and cruelty accepting the plea of respondent that on January 9, 2011 the appellant had gone to an educational institute for interview for permanent job leaving her few months old daughter and having not returned back to the matrimonial home. The plea of the appellant sought to be established by her evidence that she was not permitted to enter the house on her return from the interview, was rejected holding that she had not produced any evidence to establish her plea as she neither raised any hue and cry nor called any police official for help to impress upon the respondent and his family members to open the doors of the matrimonial home.

(2.) Briefly stated the case of the respondent- husband as pleaded in his petition for divorce is that he was married to the appellant on September 29, 2009. Parties resided together at Kaithal. After marriage, a daughter named Divya was born out of the wedlock on August 15, 2010. The behaviour of the appellant from the very beginning was harsh and arrogant and she used to pick up quarrels with the respondent and his family members on trivial matters and that she used to insult them even in the presence of friends and relatives while refusing to serve water or tea. The appellant left the matrimonial home on January 9, 2011 for interview for permanent job in Technological Education and Research Integrated Institute (TERII)by leaving her 5 months old daughter with the respondent and did not return. Appellant was searched till late night but it transpired that she was in her parental home in Kurukshetra. The appellant had been residing with her parents since January 9, 2011 till the date of filing of the petition on June 15, 2012. It is averred in the petition that the respondent had gone to the house of his in-laws in Kurukshetra to bring the appellant wife on January 10, 2011 but she flatly refused to accompany him. The respondent requested his in- laws but the appellant failed to join his company. It was pleaded that on January 29, 2011, the respondent along with his father and Pawan Kumar Sharma had visited the house of the parents of the appellant to resolve the matter but the appellant refused to join the company of the respondent.

(3.) The appellant had contested the petition for divorce taking up the objection that the respondent was estopped by his own conduct to seek any matrimonial relief. The appellant denied the allegation that she ever treated the respondent or his parents with cruelty or that she parted company of the respondent at her will. The appellant levelled counter-allegation that as a matter of fact from the very beginning, she was subjected to harassment and cruelty by the respondent and his family members on the pretext of insufficient dowry and as a matter of fact she was turned out of the matrimonial home by the respondent and his family members. The appellant never parted company of the respondent nor she shed away from her responsibility to feed and take care of few months old daughter. On account of respondent having not allowed the appellant to enter the matrimonial home she was compelled to stay away. The appellant stated that on account of demand of dowry having not been met and on account of the white spots on the hands and feet of the appellant, the respondent was upset and specifically expressed that by divorcing the appellant he would marry another beautiful girl. The appellant pleaded that she had been unconditionally ready to get herself rehabilitated in the matrimonial home and was always ready to return to the matrimonial home. The appellant claimed that the respondent himself was guilty of matrimonial wrong and was not entitled to the decree of divorce.