UPKAR SINGH Vs. SATINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Facts giving rise to this first appeal from the order of the learned District Judge, Sangrur, are as follows.

(2.) Appellant Upkar Singh and respondent Satinder Kaur were married on November 23, 1975. Within months of their marriage the relations between the parties became strained and they began to live separately since April, 1976. The appellant brought an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act 'hereinafter called the Act" for divorce on August 23, 1976. Along with that petition he filed an application under Section 14 of the Act to permit him to file the said application before the expiry , of one year from the date of marriage. That application was disallowed and consequently the application for divorce was also dismissed. The appellant then brought a second application on November 24, 1976 after the expiry of one year from marriage. In that application it was alleged that respondent Satinder Kaur was living in adultery with one Kuku alias Surinder Paul. The second ground urged was that she was treating the appellant with cruelty, that she was wearing a ring which was given to her by her paramour and she was not prepared to part with that ring at any cost and her behaviour towards him was aggressive. It was also alleged that her father filed a complaint under the Dowry Prohibition Act and under Section 406 Indian Penal Cede against him and his relations, he also made an application for obtaining warrants of the search of premises of the petitioner-appellant and that she also made an application under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for maintenance. That he was being threatened by the father and other relatives of the respondent with dire consequences The allegations in the application were resisted by the respondent-wife. It was further pleaded that the application under Section 4 of the Dowry Act was rightly filed and other legal steps were also rightly taken and that since the respondent had no source of living and maintenance she had filed the application for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The parties contested on the following Issues :

(3.) The learned District Judge decided both the issues against the petitioner-appellant and dismissed his application.