SARLA SIKRODIA Vs. KRISHAN CHANDRA SIKRODIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a wife's appeal from a decree of divorce made by the District Judge, Kota, dissolving her marriage on the ground of desertion as provided for in Section 13 (1) (i-b), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

(2.) The facts which are material for the decision of this appeal may be shortly stated here. The marriage between Dr. Krishan Chandra Sikrodia and Sarla Sikrodia was solemnized according to Hindu rites at New Delhi on June 11, 1973. Before and at the time of the marriage, the husband was employed as a medical officer in (he railway hospital, Kota. The wife is a teacher by profession. She was teaching at that time in Lady Irwin School (Junior Section). Defence Colony, New Delhi. The parties las) resided together at Kota till May 17, 1974. No issue was born in this wedtock. The wife left the matrimonial home with consent of the husband on May 17, and went to Delhi for medical examination and treatment of suspected fibroid uterine tambour. She did not thereafter return to the matrimonial home and resume cohabitation with the husband in spite of request by him. The husband filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights in the district court at Kota on Oct. 3, 1974. He filed the present petition for divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion in the same court on Dec. 21, 1976, when his petition for restitution of conjugal rights aforementioned, was still pending in that court. The petition for restitution of conjugal rights was dismissed as withdrawn on April 30, 1977.

(3.) The particulars of cruelty and desertion as given by the husband in paragraphs 4 to 8 of his petition may be recapitulated here. The wife was suffering from fibroid uterine tumour even prior to the marriage, but this fact was concealed by her and by her parents from him. He discovered this fact after the marriage. Her brothers came to Kota to take her from there to her parents house at Delhi. He allowed her to go on her representation that she would like to spend a few days at her parents house and utilize the opportunity for consultations with medical specialists regarding fibroid uterine tumour. She went to Delhi on May 17, 1974. He wrote her many letters thereafter requesting her to come back to him. He informed her well in advance about an operation on him for hernia on August 18, 1974. He sent telegrams requesting her to be by his bedside at that time. She ignored all his requests and continued to stay on in Delhi. His father died on March 13, 1975. His mother died subsequently on December 14, 1975. She did not come and join him even in his days of grief. Efforts were made by the matrimonial court during the trial of the previous petition for reconciliation. She refused to return to the matrimonial home with the result that the said efforts failed. He complained that she had throughout been adamant because she is determined to ruin the marriage bliss,