DAYA KAUSHAL Vs. BHUP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged judgment dated 10.04.2015, passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge?1, Mandi, H.P., Camp at Karsog in HMP No. 53/2012, titled as Daya Kaushal Vs. Sh. Bhup Singh, vide which, the petition filed by the appellant under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for a decree of divorce by dissolution of marriage stood dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present appeal are that appellant?petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner') filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. Her case was that 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?

(3.) The case of the petitioner was refuted by the respondent in reply. The stand of the respondent in the reply was that it was the petitioner, who used to quarrel with the respondent on petty matters and it was she who was not intending to live with the respondent as his wife. As per the respondent, the petitioner was residing separately without any cause and he was ready to take back the petitioner to his house. The factum of the parties being parents to an eight years daughter was not denied. Further, as per the respondent, the case which stood initiated against him and his family members under Section 498?A of the Indian Penal Code was a false case, which ultimately resulted in the acquittal of the accused by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Class, Karsog. It was further the stand of the respondent that petitioner was in the habit of levelling false allegations against the respondent, as she wanted to get rid of him. His behaviour towards the petitioner was always cordial. He reiterated in the reply that he was ready and willing to take back the petitioner to his house and he had requested the petitioner to come to his house. On these basis, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of decree of divorce was contested by the respondent.