ASHUTOSH GULIA Vs. MEENU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has arisen from the judgment and decree dtd. 1/3/2019 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohtak, whereby petition under Sec. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') filed by the appellant-husband for the dissolution of her marriage was dismissed.

(2.) In brief, the facts are that the marriage of the appellant-husband was solemnized with the respondent-wife on 30/1/2015 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. Out of the wedlock, a daughter was born on 2/12/2015. As per the assertions made by the appellant-husband before the Court below, the respondent-wife was a short tempered lady and used to pick up quarrel quite off and on. She was not interested in the domestic work. Under some sort of depression, she used to give beatings to her mother-in-law and grandmother-in-law. It was further stated that when the respondent-wife was in a family way, she went to her parental house on 21/1/2016 with her brother as her father was not well. The appellant-husband, however, never came to know that his father-in-law had expired on 22/1/2016. Thereafter, the marriage of his brother-in-law was solemnized on 5/2/2016, but the appellant-husband and his family members were not invited. At one point of time, the respondent-wife tried to throttle her mother-in-law. She also refused to feed the minor child with an intention to kill her.

(3.) The allegations of the appellant-husband were resisted by the respondent-wife. She pleaded that soon after solemnization of marriage, the appellant-husband started treating her with cruelty. The appellant and his family members had expectation of bringing more dowry as they were not satisfied with the quality and quantity of the dowry which respondent-wife had brought at the time of marriage. It was further pleaded that an amount of Rs.80.00 lacs was spent on the marriage and a Mahindra XUV 500 and 50 grams of gold were given by the father of the respondent-wife. Despite all this, she was harassed and tortured and was sent to her parental home after pregnancy. At one point of time, father of respondent-wife had given Rs.5.00 lacs to fulfill the demand of the appellant-husband as the same was a pre-condition to take the respondent-wife back to her matrimonial home. Thus, it was stated that the respondent-wife had performed all matrimonial obligations towards her husband and his family. The family members of the appellant-husband expected Rs.11.00 lacs in cash and a new Fortuner Car, at the time of the birth of the child. On 22/12/2015 the mother, brother and maternal uncle of the respondent-wife visited her in-laws' family and requested them to not to harass the respondent on account of their illegitimate demands. Father of the respondent-wife was seriously ill and admitted to PGIMS, Rohtak because of the pressure from the family of the respondent-wife. It was further stated that on 21/1/2016, after taking permission from her husband and in-laws, the respondent-wife had gone to meet her father once, who was critically ill. Her father died on 22/1/2016. Nobody from the side of her in-laws attended the last rites of her father. Neither the appellant nor any of his family members attended the marriage of her brother. On 17/3/2016, the respondent went to her matrimonial home with her brother and maternal uncle but she was not allowed to enter. Under these compelling circumstances, she returned to her parental house.