- (1.) LEAVE granted.
(2.) THIS Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 07th May, 2007 passed by the High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 302 of 1996 whereby the High Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the husband-appellant. Facts giving rise to this appeal are:The marriage took place between the appellant and the respondent on 26.02.1993 and a female child was born on 6.12.1993. In the petition filed by the appellant, it was alleged that soon after the marriage the respondent was behaving in a cruel manner derogatory to the appellant and the family members; that the respondent avoided staying in the matrimonial home and never remained there for more than 25 days together; and that after leaving the matrimonial home on 19.5.1993 while she was pregnant with the child, the respondent never returned to live with the appellant. It was also alleged that the father of the respondent is a retired Sub-Inspector of the Delhi Police and brother is a Constable and both used to extend threats to the appellant and his family members that they would be implicated in false cases. Respondent in her written statement stated that on 14.09.1994, the appellant and his family members gave her a severe beating which led to her being medically examined by the doctors at Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital. A copy of the extract of the MLC register on that date was enclosed to the written statement. It was also stated that the appellant and his mother had taken the jewellery of the respondent and given it to the wife of the appellant's brother and on asking, respondent was again assaulted and sought to be burnt alive by the family members of the appellant.
(3.) THE trial Court after examining the evidence came to the conclusion that no case of cruelty had been made out as alleged by the appellant. The Trial Court held that considering that the respondent had been turned out of the matrimonial house and had been given beatings for which she was medically examined, it was the respondent who was treated cruelly by the appellant. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal in the High Court. The High Court, by the impugned order, while dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant-husband, observed in paras 13 & 17 as under: 13. The respondent has categorically stated in her examination-in-chief that the appellant and her in laws beat her mercilessly on 14.09.1994 as a result of which she was medically examined at the Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi on 15.09.1994. She has also withstood the cross-examination on this aspect. On a reading of the entire evidence, it is not possible to conclude that the appellant has been able to establish that the respondent treated him with cruelty. 17. In the instant case, the respondent wife has both before the trial Court and this Court been able to demonstrate that far from treating the appellant with cruelty, she in fact suffered cruelty at the hands of the appellant. To grant divorce to the appellant despite this only on the ground of irretrievable breakdown would not, in the view of this Court, be doing justice to the respondent.ï¿ 1/2 We are not inclined to interfere with the finding of fact of both the courts below that it was the appellant who treated the respondent with cruelty, rather than the other way around. ;