PARTAP Vs. VEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called the 'Act'), is directed against the judgment dated 18.1.1992 passed by Additional District Judge (1), Kangra Division at Dharamshala, Camp at Palampur, whereby the petition under the Section 13 of the Act filed by the appellant-husband for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent-wife and decree of divorce was dismissed.

(2.) THE marriage between the parties was solemnised on January 27, 1989. Admittedly, the marriage was consummated and the parties lived together as husband and wife in their matrimonial home at Village Kandthala, Tehsil Palampur, District Kangra till 12th February, 1989 when the appellant-husband returned to his posting in Arunachal. Thereafter, the appellant-husband came on annual leave and lived with respondent-wife from 20th December, 1989 to 11th February, 1990.

(3.) THE respondent-wife opposed the petition for divorce and denied the allegations made therein. According to her she gave birth to a male child on 12th July, 1990 and not on 13th April, 1990. She has also stated that it was a premature delivery in about seven months of the pRegulation ncy. She has further stated that parents of the appellant-husband very well knew about the pRegulation ncy and according to the custom they had consented that she might go to her parents' house for the purpose of delivery. It is specifically denied that the child born to the respondent-wife is not from the lions of the appellant and she had sexual intercourse with some other person. As per allegations, in order to get remarried the appellant-husband had levelled false charge of adultery on her.