JARNAIL SINGH Vs. SHAKUNTLA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Jarnail Singh has filed this appeal against the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur vide which his application under S. 13 (1)(i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called as the Act) was dismissed. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:-- The parties were married in the year 1957. Out of the wedlock five children were born. three daughters and two sons. The parties lived cordially up to the year 1973, but later on the relations became strained and the present appellant and the respondent did not live together. Consequently the appellant filed an application under S. 13 (1)(i-a) and (i-b) of the Act for divorce on the basis of cruelty and desertion. It was alleged in the application that she left the house of the appellant on the pretext that she wanted to attend the Akhand Path Bhog ceremony at the house of her father in village Kukowal and after that she never came back in spite of the attempts made by the appellant. The main ground given in the application was that she wanted a share in the property of Dhanpat who is the uncle of the appellant which he refused and on this account she had deserted him. This application was resisted by the respondent-wife and the allegations in the application were denied. It was alleged that she was turned out of the house along with her daughters after giving beatings to her. She also denied the incident of May 22, 1973 which is mentioned in the application of the appellant. It was further alleged in her written statement that as the appellant had illicit relations with one Varinder Kumari a J. B. T. teacher, he started maltreating her and ultimately turned her out and that he also filed a defamation application under S. 500 of the I.P.C. against her with a view to put pressure on her to get divorce. She filed maintenance application on her own behalf and on behalf of her children which was allowed by the Court of January 19, 1976. The parties contested on the following issues:-

(2.) Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner for continuous period of two years immediately preceding the presentation of this petition ? O P A.

(3.) The learned Additional District Judge after perusing the evidence dismissed the application of the appellant.