CHANDAN KUMARI Vs. JEEWAN LAL (DR)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil First Appeal is directed against the Judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Poonch, dated 6th June, 1974 by which he granted a decree of judicial separation under section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act on a petition of the respondent.

(2.) THE brief facts on the basis of which the petition was riled by the respondent, Dr. Jeewan Lal, under section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, may be noticed first: The parties were married in the town of Poonch on 11th December 1969, according to Hindu rites. According to the respondent, the parties lived together as husband and wife for a period of only one month whereas according to the appellant the parties lived together for a period of two months. The respondent at the time of his marriage, was working as a Dental Surgeon in the District Hospital, at Rajouri. According to the respondent, the appellant right from the time of her marriage was behaving in a very strange manner like a person of unsound mind. In his petition under section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the respondent alleged that during the time when the parties lived together he gathered an impression from the talks of the appellant that she had earlier had illicit sexual relations with some third person before her marriage that on discovery of this the respondent got such a shock that he became ill; that the appellant did not care for his illness, did not look after him and without any reasonable cause and without even informing him, she went to her parents house on 1st or 2nd of January, 1970, and thereafter, continuously deserted him without any justification. It is further averred by him that in spite of all the draw backs of the appellant, the respondent tried his best to bring her back to the matrimonial home but the appellant and her parents prevented the parties to resume normal matrimonial relations. The respondent also urged that without any fault on his part the appellant had willfully deserted him for a period of more than two years from the beginning of January, 1970 and that the appellant had been for a period of more than two year from the marriage been of unsound mind. The respondent prayed for a decree of judicial separation for the two reasons to quote the respondent in his own words: (a) "Wilful desertion of the society of the applicant by the respondent for more than two years. (b) Unsoundness of mind of the respondent before the marriage and has been continuously of unsoundness mind up -till now for more than two years after the marriage. She had left without the consent of the applicant and against the wishes of the applicant. The applicant is entitled to this decree for judicial separation for the above mentioned grounds as provided under section in Clauses A and E of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 (25 of 1955)"

(3.) THE appellant contested the petition and filed her objections. She submitted that she was not a person of unsound mind; that she had never had any sexual relations with any third person and that she had not deserted the respondent. She claimed that the respondent, with malafide intention kept her away at her fathers house under some legal advice for more than two years so as to be able to file a petition for judicial separation. She asserted that she had not willfully and deliberately abstained from the society of the Respondent and that on the other hand the respondent had forced her to live separately and, therefore, he could not seek any relief on the basis of his own wrong. From the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the non -applicant is a mental patient and whether she was so prior wedding and whether this fact was hidden from the applicant prior to the marriage? O. P. P. 2. Whether the non -applicant has deserted her husband only after living with him for a period of one month and whether she has since refused to live with the applicant despite repeated requests? 3. Relief.