PARAM DEEP Vs. SUSHMA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This FAO (HMA) is directed against the judgment dated 17.11.2015, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge -I, Kangra at Dharamshala, Distt. Kangra, H.P. in HMA No. 40 -D/III/07.

(2.) Key facts, necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that the appellant -petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) has instituted a petition under Sec. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), against the respondent. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 5.12.1994 according to Hindu rites and customs at Nangal, Roopnagar (Punjab). A daughter was born out of the wed lock on 23.2.1996. According to the averments contained in the petition, the petitioner was in service and posted at Tonk in Rajasthan. After the marriage the respondent did not accompany him to Tonk, however, preferred to live with his parents at Talwara. In the month of May, 1996, the petitioner was transferred to Talwara where both the parties resided together. In the month of July, 1996, the father of the petitioner was transferred to Nangal. The respondent instead of staying with the petitioner at Talwara went to her parents' house at village Badala. In the month of May, 1997, the petitioner was transferred to Dharamshala and as such, he went to village Badala to bring the respondent, but she preferred to stay at Nangal with the parents of the petitioner. In the month of December, 1997, the respondent left Nangal and instead of coming to Dharmamshala went to her parents' house at village Badala. In the month of May, 2001, the respondent lodged a false complaint against the petitioner and his parents, brother and sister at Police Station, Nangal. The matter was compromised. After one month, the petitioner brought the respondent to Dharamshala and the parties lived together for some time. After that the respondent left the company of the petitioner. The petitioner was constrained to file a petition under Sec. 9 of the Act on 11.4.2002. In retaliation, the respondent also filed a petition under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C. before the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una on 25.5.2002. The learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una ordered monthly maintenance of Rs. 2500/ - to the respondent. The respondent has left the company of the petitioner.

(3.) The petition was contested by the respondent. She denied the averments made in the petition. According to her, the petitioner was having extra marital affair with one Lata Sharma daughter of Baba Jayendra Puri of Baijnath temple. The petitioner did not prefer to take respondent along with him to Tonk in Rajasthan. The petitioner himself asked the respondent to stay with his parents at Talwara. When the parents of the petitioner went to Nangal, the respondent did not go to her parents' house at village Badala but she went to her in -laws house at Nangal. The family of the petitioner used to maltreat her. They used to abuse her on the pretext that she was not beautiful and has not brought sufficient dowry. The petitioner and his parents also held the respondent guilty for delivering a female child. The petitioner never asked the respondent to join his company at Dharamshala on his transfer. She was forced to report the matter to the police when the cruelty of the in -laws became intolerable. The matter was compromised on 17.6.2001. The respondent stayed at Dharamshala for three months in rented accommodation but the petitioner stayed in some other accommodation. She admitted that petition was filed under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C since the petitioner had refused to maintain her. The matter was compromised before learned Addl. District Judge -II, Kangra at Dharamshala. However, the petitioner kept the respondent again in separate accommodation. The petition was dismissed by the learned Addl. District Judge -II, Kangra at Dharamshala on 17.11.2015.