LAWS(RAJ)-1999-3-9

SHIMLA DEVI Vs. KULDEEP SHARMA

Decided On March 10, 1999
SHIMLA DEVI Appellant
V/S
KULDEEP SHARMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-Smt. Shimla Devi is the wife of the respondent-Shri Kuldeep Sharma, who has challenged the judgment and decree dated 16-11-96 of the learned Judge of the Family Court, Jaipur by which the marriage between the appellant and the respondent has been dissolved and hence a decree of divorce has been passed after recording a finding that the respondent-husband has succeeded in proving his case of desertion alleged by him against the appellant-wife.

(2.) The marriage between the parties was performed on 12th June, 1987 according to the Hindu Rites at Karauli District Sawaimadhopur and thereafter the appellant-wife came to Jaipur along with her husband but on 12th June, 1987 (sic) the brother of the appellant and some other relatives came to take her back and on 19th June, 1987 she went to her parents' place and again on 23-8-87 she came to her husband's place, where she lived till 10-9-87 and thereafter went back to Karauli.

(3.) On 18-10-93 the respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Family Court at Jaipur seeking a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion and, therefore, has given a detailed account of his marital life alleging that his wife/appellant-herein, is under the influence of her foster parents Shri Tejbhan Chouhan and Smt. Premlata Chouhan. The respondent-husband is the only son of his parents and has four sisters and thus, he has lot of family responsibilities. He alleged that his wife Shimla Devi after marriage kept on nagging him that she would not live with her parents and sisters and she kept on pestering him daily to take her for outings in the evening and during the day time she insisted that she be kept at her foster grand-mother's place and while coming back from office pick her up from there. The respondent-husband has further alleged that the appellant is an aggressive and a cantankerous woman. She ridiculed and misbehaved with her parents and often insulted them. The appellant is also accused of shirking from the household chores and whenever his mother cooked food and did cleaning of the house, she picked up faults in it which created great mental tension to the respondent-husband. He has further alleged that on 27-8-1987 the wife threatened that she would teach him a lesson and that she was there only for 5-10 days. She thereafter, left from 29-8-88 to 11-10-88 at her in-laws' place at Jaipur, but there was no improvement in her behaviour and on 10-10-88 she threatened that she would return only when the husband made separate arrangement by arranging a separate house for her. The respondent states that due to her insistence, he arranged for a separate kitchen from her parents in the same house and she also started cooking separately with which the respondent-husband was quite upset and only when he made this arrangement on 25-8-1989 that the wife returned to her in-laws' place. He has further narrated the previous history that from 16-9-1989 to 11-10-1989 they went on a tour to South-India and there also the wife did not listen to him and insulted him on one pretext or the other, with which he was greatly hurt and on 13-10-1989 at 10'O clock in the morning she started quarrelling with him for repair of the Mixer-Grinder and thereafter, went to her foster grand-mother's house where she went to persuade him to come back where she caught hold of his collar and abused him ferociously with which he was again mentally upset. From 15-10-1989 to 4-6-1991 the appellant-wife lived at her parents' place at Karauli. During this period the respondent himself went there to bring her back, but she flatly refused and said that she does not want to live with him. Thereafter, he received a letter from Karauli on 10-11-1989 that his wife suffered an abortion and according to the respondent-husband, this was an induced abortion of his wife without his consent. This also caused great mental hurt to the respondent-husband. However, she came to Jaipur on 5-6-1991 with great difficulty just for a day to attend his sister's wedding on 6-6-1991 and thereafter, insisted to come back to Karauli and put a condition that in future she would return only if he arranged for a separate house. During this period, she quarrelled on trivial matters because she did not want to live in a joint family. On 1-9-1991 the appellant-wife on the occasion of 'Janmashtmi' festival went to Karauli and thereafter she never returned and then he learnt that in December, 1991 she took-up the job of a Teacher in Udaipur District. On 23-3-1993 the respondent having been fed-up of the entire situation sent a registered notice to the appellant that she should come back and live with him as a wife within a period of 15 days or else he would take legal steps but she neither responded to the letter nor made any effort to come back. She had also locked her gifts which she had received from her father in an Almirah under lock and took the key along with her due to which no articles could be used and thereafter, when she did not return, the appellant filed the application for a decree of divorce in the Family Court.