ANIL PAUL SINGH Vs. SUMAN BALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal stands directed against the judgment rendered by the learned Additional District Judge (III), Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P., on 31.03.2015 in H.M.A. Petition No. 30-P/III/13/06, whereby, the petition aforesaid constituted before him by the petitioner/appellant herein, stood dismissed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/appellant was married to the respondent on 22.01.2004, according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies at Dheera, Teh. Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. Thereafter, parties lived as husband and wife and female child namely Ananya was born from their wedlock on 10.11.2004. It is contended that respondent perpetuated mental and physical atrocities on the petitioner and has been deprived of the matrimonial bliss. The respondent is extremely volatile in nature and has erratic behaviour. It is contended that one of the neighbour told the petitioner that the respondent was suffering from mental disorder, as she has been extremely cruel and egoistic towards the petitioner. She refused to stay with the parents of the petitioner, as she does not want to live in his house and she wants to live in her parents' house. Thereafter her father took her away. On 14.02.2004, the petitioner went to the house of respondent's parents' house and requested her to come back, but she refused. Thereafter in the month of March, 2004, petitioner again visited the respondent's parents' house and requested her to come back but she again refused to accompany him. It is further pleaded that the respondent and her parents insulted the petitioner and taunted that the petitioner is good for nothing, even though he was working in Delhi, he could not arrange for gifts for the respondent. The petitioner brought the respondent to Delhi, when she started living with him, he came to know that the understanding of the respondent was extremely slow and the conduct and behaviour of the respondent was as if she mentally unfit. It is further pleaded that she would not wake up till the time he had left the house and the petitioner had to left to office without food and when he came from the office, she refused to prepare meals to him. It is contended that respondent fought with the petitioner and she would also threaten the petitioner that she would commit suicide while the petitioner is away and would implicate him in a false case. On 15.08.2004, when petitioner had called his friends and their wives to his house for lunch, but the respondent had refused to prepare food for them. On 2nd week of September, 2004, the petitioner requested the respondent to iron his shirt, the respondent left the iron on the shirt of the petitioner and went off to sleep, consequently, the shirt of the petitioner got burnt and on inquiry by the petitioner, she thrown iron on the petitioner. The respondent was extremely uncooperative and disrespectful towards the parents of the petitioner. On 13.11.2004, the petitioner reached the house of the respondent to meet his daughter, but the parents of the respondent did not allow the petitioner to meet the respondent and new born daughter on one pretext or the other. The petitioner was humiliated and insulted by the respondent in the marriage of younger sister of the respondent. On 25.11.2004, when the petitioner left for Delhi, the respondent again created a scene in the house of the petitioner's parents and demanded that the respondent and the new born girl should be sent to her father's house. In April, 2006, the petitioner alongwith his relative and respectable persons of the village requested the respondent and her parents to sent back her with the petitioner, then parents of the respondent relied that they will not sent the respondent to Delhi/native house of the petitioner and the only way to survive the marriage is that the petitioner should stay in the house of respondent as "Ghar Jamai". Hence the petition.

(3.) The petition for divorce instituted by the petitioner/appellant herein before the learned Additional District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala stood contested by the respondent herein, by hers instituting a reply thereto, wherein, she controverted all the allegations constituted against her in the apposite petition. She has denied that she had ever treated the petitioner with cruelty. She has also denied that she was extremely violent in nature and has an errant behaviour. She has also denied that she was suffering from any mental disorder.