ROHINI KUMARI Vs. NARENDRA SINGH
LAWS(SC)-1971-12-1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ALLAHABAD)
Decided on December 02,1971

ROHINI KUMARI Appellant
VERSUS
NARENDRA SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This is an appeal from the judgement of the Allahabad High Court wherein special leave was granted limited to the question of law as to the interpretation of S. 10 (1) (a)read with the Explanation of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, hereinafter called the 'Act'.
(2.) The undisputed facts are that the parties got married in 1945 and in February 1947 the wife went to Alirajpur her parental home. She never returned thereafter. In 1953 the husband, who was a member of the Indian Foreign Service met a Dutch lady - Countess Rita - while he was posted abroad. He married her only a day before the Act came into force. In August 1955 the husband filed a petition in the court of a Munsif for judicial separation under S.10 of the Act on the ground of the wife's descretion. An ex parte degree was passed against the wife which was later on set aside. The wife also raised an objection that the Munsif had no jurisdiction to grant the decree. That objection was accepted and the plaint was returned for being presented to the proper court. In 1959 the husband divorced Countess Rita. The Trial court delivered its judgement in July 1964 allowing the husband's petition for judicial separation and granting a decree for that relief. The matter was taken in appeal to the first appellate court which affirmed the decision of the trial court. A second appeal was filed to the High Court by the wife which was heard by a learned single judge but he referred the same to a division bench. The division bench dismissed the appeal but directed the husband to pay Rs. 150/- per month to the wife by way of maintenance.
(3.) The concurrent findings of the trial court and the first appellate court which were not questioned before the High Court were these: (1) During her stay at Sarela (husband's home) the wife was provided with decent accommodation, wholesome food and all such amenities which were available at Sarela. (2) It was wrong that she was given inhuman treatment at Sarela during her stay there and that she had developed heart trouble as a result of it as alleged by the wife. (3) The wife had left Sarela for her parental home (Alirajpur) with the intention of permanently giving up her marital relation with the husband and not to return to Sarela or to her husband . (4) The wife left her matrimonial home without any reasonable cause and without the consent of the husband and with the intention of bringing cohabitation to an end. (5) The marriage of the husband with Countess Rita did not have any such impact on the mind of the wife that it caused her to continue to live apart and to continue the desertion.;


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