SIKANDER SINGH Vs. VEERPAL KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the husband- Sikander Singh impugning the judgment and decree dated 05.02.2015 passed by Addl. District Judge, Faridkot whereby the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') filed by him was dismissed.

(2.) Few facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as pleaded in the petition filed by the appellant-husband before the learned Court below may be noticed. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 28.03.2010 as per Sikh rites and ceremonies. The parties cohabited together as husband and wife for about a month. No child was born out of the said wedlock. At the time of marriage, it was told by the parents of the respondent-wife that she was about 18/19 years of age but later on it was revealed that she in fact was 26 years old. On the very first night of their marriage, when the appellant-husband went to his room, the respondent-wife raised a hue and cry, which baffled him so much so that he was left with no other choice but to sleep on the floor. The following day when he visited the house of his parents-in-law with the respondent-wife, the wife was unwilling to accompany him back. However, after much persuasion by him, she returned back to her matrimonial home. Between 31.03.2010 to 14.05.2010, the respondent-wife left her matrimonial home on many occasions and each time was brought back by the appellant and his family after a great deal of persuasion. On 17.05.2010 while the appellant was sleeping, he heard the mobile phone of the wife vibrate. When he called back on the number from which the call had come, it was answered by one Paramjit from Dabwali. On questioning the respondent-wife about the call, she started arguing and instantly called up her parents by narrating an altogether distorted story to them. On 19.05.2010, her parents came to the matrimonial home and took her away. On 05.07.2010, the appellant-husband and his family yet again managed to bring back the respondent-wife after much persuasion, however, the same was short lived as she again expressed her wish to go back to her parental house. The appellant-husband accompanied the respondent-wife to her parental home. On the same night, his wife and mother-in-law went out in a car and on return the wife had Rs. 700/- in cash with her. On inquiring where she had gone and from where she had got the money, the respondent-wife immediately complained to her mother who used derogatory language and levelled false allegations on him. Fearing for his safety, he left the house in the wee hours of the morning. Thereafter, the respondent-wife lodged a complaint in the Women's Cell levelling false allegations against the appellant. The appellant-husband went to the house of his parents-in-law after assuring the Women's Cell and brought his wife back to the matrimonial home. The respondent-wife's quarrelsome behaviour continued as before and finally her parents came and took her back. Thereafter, in the intervening night of 21/22.10.2010, the parents, brother of the respondent-wife along with 6-7 others, all residents of village Channu, in connivance with the respondent-wife, armed with deadly weapons forcibly entered the house of the appellant-husband and attacked him and his family, committed a theft of gold ornaments and Rs. 50,000/- in cash before fleeing in a maruti car bearing registration No. GBW3608 and one Tata Sumo jeep. The appellant-husband then lodged a FIR as well as a criminal complaint qua the alleged occurrence. On 27.12.2010 in the presence of respectables, the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife executed an affidavit to end their marriage wherein the respondent-wife stated that all her dowry articles had been handed back to her and there was nothing due to be returned. The appellant-husband pleaded that the said Paramjit who had purportedly been phoning up the respondent-wife could not be impleaded as a party as he was not aware of his address, parentage etc.

(3.) On the contrary, respondent-wife by way of her written statement filed before the Court below refuted and categorically denied the allegations of the appellant-husband. She submitted that about Rs. 2 1/2 lakhs were spent on her marriage and a huge dowry was given to her which was still in the possession of the appellant-husband. She would be subjected to cruel and harsh treatment as the appellant and his family were dissatisfied with the dowry given to her at the time of marriage. Even though she never shirked her matrimonial duties, she was subjected to both physical and verbal abuse. So much so, her father-in-law outraged her modesty and when she complained to her husband about the same, he in turn questioned her own character. She submitted that she filed a complaint against her father-in-law in the Women's Cell in retaliation to which the appellant-husband also lodged a FIR against father and brother of the respondent-wife and threw her out of her matrimonial home. A compromise thereafter was arrived at between the parties. Ever since then, her parents had been trying to reason out with the appellant-husband and her parents-in-law to take her back to her matrimonial home but the appellant-husband had been refusing time and again by showing them papers signed by her wherein she had allegedly agreed to a mutual divorce. She submitted that her signatures on the said documents were forged and she wanted her marriage to survive but her parents-in-law were not allowing her to set foot in the matrimonial home till she got a maruti car.