SHRI KAMAL SHARMA Vs. SMT. MINAKSHI SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the judgment dated 8.8.2006 passed by learned District Judge, Shimla in a petition Under Sec. 13 of Hindu Marriage Act registered as Petition No. 46-S/3 of 2004, the petitioner-husband has approached this Court by filing the present appeal with a prayer to quash and set aside the same.

(2.) The petitioner has solemnized marriage with the respondent on 1.8.1991 as per Hindu rites and rituals. They lived together as husband and wife and there are three children, two females and one male, born to them out of this wedlock. The petitioner-husband was deaf and dumb by birth. The complaint is that after marriage the respondent has started treating him with cruelty. The instances of cruelty as highlighted in the petition were that the respondent not accompanying him to attend social gathering, not prepared to live with him in the same bedroom, do not look after the children, neglects his old ailing father, finds excuses not to have sexual relation with him, lodged false complaint against him in the police station, went to her mother's place during children's holidays and on return after three months, refused to share bedroom with him and that her relations visits her off and on and she do not inform either the petitioner or his father nor disclose their identity to them. The petitioner, therefore, have filed the petition in the trial Court for dissolution of his marriage with respondent by a decree of divorce on the grounds as aforementioned.

(3.) In reply, the respondent-wife has raised objections qua maintainability of the petition and that the same does not disclose an enforceable cause of action and also that the same suffers from delay and latches. On merits, while denying the instances of cruelty the petitioner referred to in the petition, it is submitted that she never neglected him nor any question of her refusal to accompany him in social gathering arise. The children are living with her and also the petitioner. There is no question of not attending to the children. She submits that her relations with the petitioner are very cordial and she never harassed him mentally or physically. Also that, their relations as husband and wife still exists. The complaint she lodged was against the petitioner as he being persuaded by his father and sister Nain Tara used to treat her with cruelty. Also that, the petitioner usually comes to house late in the night and addicted to drinks. It is also submitted that she is in talking terms with the petitioner and residing in the matrimonial home. It is denied that she is not cohabiting with the petitioner. The petitioner has allegedly concocted a story just to get rid of his liabilities which he otherwise is duty bound to discharge.