KUNAL MEHRA Vs. MANISHA MEHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the appellant as well as Mrs. Saumya Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) The present appeal under Sec. 19(1) of the Family Court Act, 1984 has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with dismissal of his suit for grant of decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty under Sec. 13 (1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act of 1955) vide judgment and decree dtd. 27/7/2023 and 16/8/2023 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Hazaribagh in Original Suit No.25 of 2023.

(3.) The factual background of the case is that appellant was married with respondent in accordance with Hindu rites and customs on 15/2/2013 at Hotel Maurya, Patna (State of Bihar). It is alleged that father of the respondent assured to the family members of the appellant that the respondent is a very educated, cultured and sober girl, who is able to look after all family affairs and will be proved to be an ideal wife, daughter-in-law in the family of appellant. Therefore, the marriage was settled and father of respondent was not able to bear the huge expenses of the marriage and desired to solemnize in a temple but the appellant's family took responsibility of meeting the marriage expenses in a hotel bearing considerable portion of the expenses. It is further stated that the appellant's family is a joint family consisting with his father and uncle who are living in jointness along with all family members in mess and residence. The father of appellant was in job of United Bank of India and was mostly posted away from Patna and all the family affairs were undertaken by the uncle of petitioner as a guardian of the joint family and spread his love and affection to the appellant, his sister as well as his own children. It is alleged that just after the marriage and joining the matrimonial home, the conduct and behavior of the respondent was found unexpected and derogatory to the concept of joint family. She was not participating in the household affairs rather showed the attitude of aggression, stubbornness and habit to avail undue freedom from guardianship and due to these reasons the respondent was always uncomfortable in the family atmosphere of the appellant and frequently used to quarrel with the appellant, his mother as well as uncle without any sense of respect to them. The respondent was also making imputations against the character of uncle of the appellant and tried to spread enmity in the joint family and hatred against the uncle and aunt of the appellant. She also ignored the appellant and was not desirous to fulfill her conjugal obligations. She also insisted upon family for partition from the uncle of the appellant. It is alleged that due to aggressive and rude behaviour of the respondent and insisting for partition between beloved brothers of the father of appellant, the appellant's father came under extreme depression. The appellant continued to pursue the respondent to mend herself and respect to every family member but no positive change in her behaviour took place and under state of affairs both were blessed with a son on 23/1/2015. The respondent continued to insist for partition to be effected in between the appellant and his uncle's family then appellant also attempted to take help of respondent's parents but instead of taking any step to mend their daughter's behaviour, the parents of respondent also instigated her through their ill advice to hold control over every family member. It is also alleged that on the occasion of birth of first son, respondent's mother visited to Patna and was welcome by the appellant and his family members where she stayed about 2-3 days. In this interval, parents of appellant had gone to attend a marriage function out of Patna and taking advantage of absence of the appellant's parents, the respondent and her mother started quarrelling with uncle and aunt of the appellant abusing them in filthy language which was also heard by the adjacent neighbours causing impression of humiliation and shame in the family. The respondent also extends threat to the appellant and his parents that if partition is not affected, she will proceed to her maternal home and will not come back unless there is partition between appellant's uncle and father. The appellant's parents made their efforts to persuade the respondent for leaving her obstinacy and stubbornness, but all went in vain and they succumbed with very heavy heart before the respondent which led in partition between appellant's father and uncle on 6/3/2015 on the occasion of festival of Holi. Thereafter, health of the father of appellant started deteriorating and he was arrested with the disease of Cancer but the respondent instead of serving her father-in-law during illness went to her parental home at Hazaribagh along with the child and stayed there. When she was asked to come back and join the company of the appellant, she started pressurizing the appellant to get transfer of his house in her name. The appellant along with his mother, sister, brother-in-law went to Hazaribag and requested for 'Bidai' of respondent but she did not return rather they were humiliated at the instance of respondent and her parents. In the month of July 2016, the respondent joined a job in a school at Hazaribagh and did not even come to look after the ailing father of the appellant. It is further alleged that the father of the appellant took his last breath on 3/3/2019. Hearing about the message of death of the appellant's father, the respondent instead of expressing any feeling of sorrow stoutly raised her demand to get the family house transferred in her name or to purchase a new flat. In the meantime, the second son of the appellant was also born on 5/3/2020. It is further alleged that the appellant somehow got some recording of the conversation of the respondent with her father wherein her father had advised the respondent to contact known high ups and get her in-laws person beaten for teaching a lesson to them and to agree to accept her demand. The appellant on getting knowledge of the same was very much shocked and upset. It is further alleged that the appellant had also caught the respondent having an extramarital relationship with one Gagan and their bold and exposed conversation itself disclosed the extramarital relationship between them. When the appellant confronted the respondent for the said fact and his knowledge about the same then she conceded and assured the appellant not to continue any relationship with the said man but she continued in said illicit relationship and had broken the trust of the appellant. The appellant was completely unable to continue in the matrimonial tie with the respondent, but was worried about his children. Hence, he was badly sandwiched in that situation. The appellant in the interest of children, even without condoning the cruelty of the respondent, did try to continue the relationship with the respondent unwillingly. It is further alleged that on 13/11/2020, since morning, the respondent was making a hue and cry at house, despite the request of the appellant and his mother not to do such act as that was an auspicious day of 'Dhanteras'. The respondent after making hue and cry scolded and assaulted appellant's mother and thereafter about 01:30 pm, she left the house with both the children without disclosing about her whereabouts. The appellant searched about her and also informed to local police station but no clue of his wife and children was found. On 15/11/2020, the respondent came to the appellant's house along with brother, brother's wife, a male friend and one lady officer from local police station and collected her belongings and despite appellant's request to stay at matrimonial home, she did not agree to stay and threatened to take divorce from the appellant. She also kept the children with her, under such situation, the appellant gave a cheque of Rs.1.00 Lakh to the respondent for the welfare of children. It is further stated that the appellant also filed a case for restitution of conjugal rights under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act but in the meanwhile, the respondent had instituted a criminal case against the appellant. Therefore, he withdrew the said case. He also endeavoured to take all measures for reconciliation but all in vain due to extreme cruel behaviour of the respondent. Therefore, it is not possible for the appellant to continue conjugal rights and obligations and matrimonial tie with his wife (Respondent). Hence, the case for grant of decree of divorce has been instituted on the ground of cruelty under Sec. 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.