RAJKUMAR S/O SHRI HANUMAN PRASAD Vs. SUMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 19 (4) of the Family Court's Act 1984 against the judgment and decree dated 14th of July, 2017 passed by learned Judge Family Court No.1, Bikaner in Civil Misc. Case No.163/2012 (478/2014) (Rajkumar Vs. Suman) , whereby he dismissed the application filed by the appellant under Section 13-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Act of 1955) and refused to grant decree for divorce.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the marriage of the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 23.06.2004 at Village Rawla, Tehsil Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar as per Hindu customs and rituals. Subsequently a son was born from the wedlock who was about 4 years of age at the time of filing of the application. It is also stated that after some time of the marriage the respondent/wife started committing mental cruelty with him as she did not take any interest the house work and always remained ready to quarrel with the appellant. She was specifically alleging that he (appellant) is a gambler in front of relatives and family members and gave threatening for implication him and his family members in false case, therefore, the appellant suffer mental agony by her rude behavior. Further, a false case was registered under Section 498A and 406 of IPC against the appellant and his family members, in which the police gave negative final report and the same was accepted by the court concerned. The respondent/wife voluntarily went to her parents' house and despite making best of efforts at social level by the appellant, the appellant did not come to reside the appellant. The respondent-wife specifically denied to live with him and also refused to take mutual divorce with consent.

(3.) Upon the aforesaid facts, the divorce application was filed, in which the respondent-wife filed reply and accepted the factum of marriage and birth of son from their wedlock, however, she denied other allegations levelled in the divorce application and shown her willingness to live with appellant along with her son. In the reply, it was stated by the respondent-wife appellant has extramarital affair with one girl, namely, Neetu and he used to life with her, therefore, appellants wants to take divorce and for said reason forcibly expelled her from the house. It was further stated that in the proceedings before this Court against forcibly marriage of said Neetu, an affidavit was filed by the appellant that Neetu is his girl friend and this fact is not refuted by the appellant.