RASHI KAKKAR Vs. HARMINDER SINGH BINDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-wife has filed the present appeal against the judgment and decree dated 24.03.2015 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Panchkula, whereby her petition under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (for short "the Act") seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce was dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated, marriage between the parties was solemnized on 23.01.2005 according to Sikh rites and ceremonies. Out of this wedlock, one female child Yana was born on 210.2009. However, immediately after two months of the marriage, parents of the respondent-husband started displaying inimical behaviour towards her. She was blamed for practicing "black magic" which in fact was never done by the appellant, rather used to be played by the parents of the respondent-husband. She was accused of committing theft of household goods which were actually recovered from the possession of her mother-in-law. She was forced by her in-laws to undergo sex determination test of her foetus as the respondent family was eager to have a male child. At the time of her delivery, she was admitted in Alchemist Hospital, Panchkula. No one from the family of the respondent attended her while she was in hospital. They were disappointed after hearing the news of birth of a girl child and avoided joining the essential ceremonies commensurate with the birth of a child. On 13.12009 when the appellant had gone to her matrimonial house at Mohali, she was not welcomed either by the respondent-husband or his family members. On 17.12009 when the appellant complained of abdominal pain, she was not taken to the nearby doctor. Though on the next day, the respondent dropped her at Alchemist Hospital. The respondent did not attend her personally rather called appellant's brother to attend her. She was threatened and abused by the respondent when the appellant asked the respondent to take her back in the matrimonial home. The respondent rather asked the appellant to bring sufficient money and articles necessary for the upbringing of a girl child. On 20.12009, parents of the appellant along with relatives visited the respondent's house but the respondent and his parents reiterated their demand for money and valuables of an amount of Rs. 2 lacs. The respondent abused and physically hurt her family members and relatives. The respondent withdrew Rs. 30,000/- by using her ATM Card of the HDFC Bank. In the month of April 2010, the respondent vacated the rental accommodation at Kendriya Vihar, Sector 25, Panchkula, without her consent and knowledge. The respondent in order to manipulate his own wrong doings had sent a legal notice dated 09.09.2010 levelling false allegations against her. The respondent did not take any step to bring her back in the matrimonial home. In this manner, the appellant was deserted by the respondent for more than 2-1/2 years without any reasonable or justifiable cause. Thus she sought divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

(3.) The respondent contested the petition on the ground of maintainability, estoppel, from act and conduct, concealment of material facts and cause of action. On merits, it has been stated that the marriage between the parties was an inter-caste love marriage resented to by appellant's parents. The respondent has denied that she was ever blamed for practicing 'black magic', stealing household valuables or compelled to undergo sex determination test of her foetus. In fact, the real cause is frequent visits of the appellant to the house of her parents/grandmother at Panchkula without his wish and consent. Still in order to save the married life, the respondent conceded to the dictate of the appellant and rather shifted to a rented accommodation leaving his parents alone despite being a single child of his parents. The appellant without any reasonable excuse herself abandoned the matrimonial home and even did not respond to legal notice dated 09.09.2010. The parents of the appellant visited the house of the respondent-husband at Mohali, but they created an undesired scene in the presence of his relatives and neighbours. The respondent not only attended the appellant when she was in her family way, but had also borne all the delivery expenses at Alchemist Hospital, Panchkula. The respondent tried his best to reconcile the matter with the appellant by visiting her relatives and friends, but she declined every such attempt. The respondent financially helped the appellant for starting a new business of glass art and deposited Rs. 60,000/- in her account.