DEEPA KUMARI CHAUHAN Vs. ASHWANI K. LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is instituted against judgment and decree dated 23.12.2013 rendered by learned District Judge (Forests), Shimla in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 6 -S/3 of 13/09.

(2.) "Key facts" necessary for adjudication of the present appeal are that marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 24.10.2007 as per Hindu rites, in village Kotli (Bir), Tehsil Baijnath, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. Parties remained together from 26.10.2007 to 11.11.2007, thereafter from 17.11.2007 to 10.12.2007 and finally from 30.12.2007 to 15.3.2008. Respondent filed a petition under section 13 (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce from the appellant. According to the respondent, the appellant left the company of the respondent and did not come back after 15.3.2008. Conduct of the appellant has caused mental agony to the respondent. Appellant was not discharging matrimonial obligations as a normal wife. She used to quarrel with the respondent on one pretext or the other. She tried to assault the respondent in the month of November 2007. One Shri Tarun Vaid who was next door neighbour of the respondent, saved the situation. She was giving open threats that she would commit suicide and implicate the whole family of the respondent in false and frivolous litigation. She was not showing due respect to the members of the family of the respondent. According to the respondent, appellant did not want to stay in joint family and disclosed that her marriage was solemnized without her consent and under pressure from her parents.

(3.) THE petition was contested by the appellant. Appellant has denied all the allegations contained in the petition. She denied that she mis -behaved with the neighbour or the senior of the respondent. she has left matrimonial house with the consent of the respondent and his mother with the assurance that respondent would bring her back after one week. She received a telephone call from the mother of the respondent that she need not come back to Shimla. She denied that she left the company of the respondent at her own, without respondent's consent.