MURLIDHAR AGRAWAL SON OF SHRI GANPAT LAL JI AGARWAL Vs. SMT. PREETI WIFE OF SHRI MURLIDHAR AGARWAL D/O SHRI BABU LAL GOYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal has been preferred against judgment and decree dated 13.6.2007 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Ajmer in Matrimonial Case No.205/2003 whereby he dismissed the petition filed by appellant under section 12(1), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act").

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 12.06.2003 appellant submitted an application under Section 12(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, stating inter alia that marriage between appellant and respondent No.1, was solemnized at Ajmer on 22.01.2003. Behaviour and attitude of respondent No.1 was abnormal from very beginning. She used to behave in fearful manner. Many times, she tried to commit suicide by jumping from window of first floor to ground floor. She also used to move her neck by giving a violent jerk by spreading her hair on head. She was not in a position to discharge her marital obligations. The behaviour of respondent No.1 is very dangerous and injurious to the health. She was suffering from an acute disease of schizophrenia prior to marriage and she was under treatment of Dr. Shiv Gautam. When the fact of misbehave and abnormal attitude of respondent No.1 was brought to notice of respondent No.2, father of respondent No.1, he admitted that treatment is going on and a Kabuliatnama (Ex.P-5) was executed on 7.5.2003 by him and mother of respondent No.1, wherein they admitted the fact that acute disease of schizophrenia was not disclosed to appellant before marriage and respondent No.1 was being treated since long prior to her marriage under Dr.Shiv Gautam.

(3.) It was also averred in the application that respondent No.1 was taken to temple of Mehandipur Balaji. She was also taken to Dr. M.M. Mathur during period from 7.5.2003 to 13.5.2003. Marriage was an outcome of fraud. Respondents submitted separate written statements and averred that appellant and his parents demanded dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- and on non( 3 of 11) [CMA-2988/2008] fulfilment of demand, false allegations were levelled against them. Respondent No.1 is M.Sc. (Chemistry). During period from 22.1.2003 to 13.5.2003, sexual intercourse took place between appellant and respondent No.1. Rejoinder was filed on behalf of appellant and all the allegations levelled against him were refuted and it was averred that no sexual intercourse took place between appellant and respondent No.1 as appellant was very much afraid of abnormal attitude and dangerous behaviour of respondent No.1. She was taken to Dr. M.M. Mathur along with all old prescription slips. After examining, Dr. Mathur issued certificate and respondent No.2 taken away his daughter. On the basis of pleadings, following issues were framed by learned trial Judge :