PAWAN DEVI Vs. CHUNI LAL
LAWS(HPH)-1997-4-7
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Decided on April 10,1997

PAWAN DEVI Appellant
VERSUS
CHUNI LAL Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

NIMRAT PREET SINGH BHULLAR V. KAMALJIT BHULLAR [REFERRED TO]
KAMALJIT BHULLAR V. NIMRAT PREET SINGH BHULLAR [REFERRED TO]
V.BHAGAT V. MRS. D. BHAGAT [REFERRED TO]
SMT. RACHAN KAUR V. SHRI BHAG SINGH [REFERRED TO]
KUNJU KESAVAN VS. M M PHILIP [REFERRED TO]
N G DASTANE VS. S DASTANE [REFERRED TO]
SAROJ RANI VS. SUDARSHAN KUMAR CHADHA [REFERRED TO]
LRISJAN LAL VS. N K BASLAS [REFERRED TO]
SURESH BALA VS. MAJOR G M S BALA [REFERRED TO]
SAVITRI BALCHANDANI VS. MULCHAND BALCHANDANI [REFERRED TO]
VINOD KUMAR SHARMA VS. NUTAN SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
KALPANA VS. SURENDRA NATH [REFERRED TO]
NEMAI KUMAR VS. MITA GHOSH [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Arun Kumar Goel, J. - (1.)- This appeal is directed against the judgmentand decree dated 10.12.1993 passed by District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala in H.M.A. No. 16-D/III/93, whereby marriage between the parties has been dissolved by a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act
(2.)Parties to the case were married on 9.3.1994 at Village Sidhpur, Mauza Khanyara, Tehsil Dharamshala, District Kangra and they have a son who was born on 24.7.1997. Cruelty was pleaded to be the ground for dissolution of marriage by the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the 'husband') against the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the 'wife'). According to the husband, after the marriage for sometime parties lived cordially, however, after 5-6 months the behaviour of the wife became indifferent towards the husband and his family members as she would pick up quarrel on small pretext and would also leave the house without the consent of the husband. Not only this, she would also hurl filthy abuses. Father of the wife was informed of such behaviour when he took her away, but with the intervention of the relations and friends settlement was brought around when the wife agreed to behave properly and lived peacefully with her husband. Still the wife resumed her old behaviour immediately after this settlement and above all she also withdrew from the society of the husband besides having refused to perform her matrimonial obligation. At this point of time when a settlement was about to be brought around by the husband, the wife refused and left for her parented house. In those circumstances a petition for divorce came to be filed by the husband which was however compromised between the parties as is evident from the copy of the order dated 6.11.1986 passed in H.M.A. No. 80/86 by District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshaia. This order was passed on the statements of the parties which have also been placed on record, pursuant to which order the parties went home together. Despite this, the wife did not mend her ways, although she had been provided with a separate residence and kitchen. In the year 1989 after having picked up quarrel with the husband, wife left her matrimonial home permanently and all efforts made by the husband in this behalf proved futile. Further case of the husband was that he has been harassed by the wife who indulged in making false allegations in petition for maintenance filed by her in relation to claim of dowry by him, maltreatment as well as second marriage. According to husband he was threatened by the wife that he would be done to death. This claim of the husband was contested and resisted by the wife who denied all the averments made against her. On the other hand, it was pleaded by the wife that it is she who has been subjected to curelty and mal-treatment because of her having brought insufficient dowry. Case of the wife further was that she was thrown out of the house by the husband after having been administered merciless beatings, and at no point of time she left her matrimonial house of her own accord. It was specifically pleaded that the husband has remarried on 7-2-1992 with one Baby. 2. On the aforesaid pleadings the parties went to trial on the following issue: 1. Whether the respondent has treated the petitioner with cruelty as alleged? O.P.P. 2. Relief.
(3.)Trial Court after examining the evidence and hearing the parties decided Issue No. 1 in favour of the petitioner and thus granted him the relief of dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce by means of impugned judgment which findings are questioned by the wife in the present appeal.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.