SMT. GURJEET KAUR W/O VISHAL SINGH D/O CHARANJEET SINGH Vs. VISHAL SINGH S/O SARDAR TEJ SINGH LABANA SIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred to examine correctness of the judgment and decree dated 6.2017, passed by learned Family Court, Sriganganagar, dismissing an application preferred by the appellant as per section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1955').

(2.) In brief, facts of the case are that appellant Smt. Gurjeet Kaur entered into a wedlock with respondent Vishal Singh as per Hindu rites and customs at Sriganganagar on 21.2014. The appellant, after marriage, shifted to her matrimonial home at Jodhpur. Alleging desertion and cruelty against the respondent, the appellant preferred an application under Section 13 of the Act of 1955 before the Family Court, Sriganganagar. As per the appellant, immediately after marriage, the respondent harassed and humiliated her by making comments about her facial looks and the family status. The harassment and humiliation extended was of high degree and that was a cause of certain disputes in matrimony. The respondent ultimately deserted the appellant and was not taking any care of her. The appellant stated that her parents made best efforts to console the parties for having good matrimony, but of no consequence as the respondent was quite adamant. In the application preferred under Section 13 of the Act of 1955 she mentioned certain specific instances pertaining to cruelty also. Despite service of notice issued by Family Court the respondent did not choose to appear before the court, therefore, on 29.9.2016 an order was passed to proceed ex-parte. The Family Court recorded the evidence adduced by the appellant and after examining that, arrived at the conclusion that the appellant failed to establish desertion and cruelty, therefore, is not entitled to have a decree to annul marriage.

(3.) In appeal, the argument advanced by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant is that the appellant in her statement quite unambiguously stated that she was deserted by the respondent and despite effort he did not choose to enjoy marriage. She also stated that the respondent was in habit of harassing and humiliating the appellant mentally as well as physically. The evidence adduced by the appellant was not at all contested by the respondent, but the Family Court ignoring the same dismissed the application preferred under Section 13 of the Act of 1955. It is asserted that the Family Court though has noticed the facts stated by the appellant on oath, but failed to appreciate the same objectively.