KIRAN DEVI Vs. VINOD KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 13. 1. 2003, passed by Judge, Family Court, No. 2, Jaipur, in Divorce Case No. 17/2001 filed on behalf of the respondent-husband whereby the petitioner for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (for short `the Act') was allowed.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that a petition under Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage was filed by the respondent-husband (for short `husband') stating therein that the marriage between the parties was solemnized as per Hindu Rites on 21. 2. 1996 and they had two issues out of their wedlock. It was averred that the appellant-wife (for short `wife') was suffering from mental disorder and even prior to her marriage she usually became unconscious and started crying. She was treated by Dr. Ramesh Sharma of her village and was also taken to Bhandari Hospital where she remained hospitalized from 1. 7. 1996 to 3. 7. 1996. Thereafter, she was also examined by Dr. Sriya at Shahpura, and then by Dr. Shiv Gautam at Jaipur on 26. 7. 1996, and the doctors had advised that she could not be left alone. It was further averred that the wife used to climb up at the top of the house and threatened to jump from there. Many a times she would even go out of her house without putting on sufficient clothes. A separate house was arranged for her stay with a hope that there would be some change in her behaviour but it was not of any consequence. On account of the aforesaid reasons, the husband had to go many a times for food out side and some times he had to visit his mother for meals. It was further averred that the wife was in habit of addressing the husband with derogative words and many a times she pushed him out side the house and even assaulted him. She also misbehaved with his aging parents. On 9. 2. 1999 the wife went to the place where the marriage party of her sister-in- law (husband's sister) was staying and there she entered in the room of the groom and caught hold of him and asked him to dance with her. When he refused, she even started abusing. On 22. 2. 199, the family members of the husband asked them to live separately so the husband started living separately but the wife was not satisfied and on 24. 2. 1999 in the night she went out of the house along with her three and half months old child and was brought back with the help of one Kharati Lal on the motor cycle. It was further averred that on 10. 7. 1999 the younger brother of the husband was to be married and the wife unmindful of her modesty roamed about without sufficient clothes. On 23. 7. 1999, she went to her village Antela and on being tried to bring her back she refused to turn up and quarrelled with all those who went there to take her back and even her family members misbehaved.

(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record as well as the evidence led by the parties.