Decided on February 17,1983

KRISHNA DEVI Respondents


N.N.Goswamy - (1.)This appeal by the husband is directed againstthe judgment dated 4/11/1981 passed by the learned Additional DistrictJudge, Delhi whereby his pstition under Section i3(l)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, was dismissed.
(2.)The appellant filed a petition for dissolution of marrige by adecree of divorce under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. It isalleged in the petition that the marriage between the parties was solemnisedin June 1962 at village Nagta, Tehsil Palampur, District Kangra accordingto Hindu rites and ceremonies. After the marrige the parties lived togetherin District Kangra and thereafter shifted to Delhi. A male child was bornout of the wedlock in the year 1967 in District Kangra. The said child wasdeformed and of unsound mind who later expired in the year 1972 at NewDelhi. It is further alleged that since the inception of marriage between theparties, the respondent was of quarrelsome nature and continued to quarrelwith the appellant. Even on the first night when the materimonial obligationwas supposed to be performed, the appellant could not perform the act ofcohabitation although the respondent was 17 years of age at that time. This act of the respondent created mental agony to the appellant. The respondentalso warned the appellant not to have sexual relation with the respondentfor at least one year following the day of marriage. The appellant, for thefirst time, cohabited with the respondent at Delhi in 1965 after a long periodof their marital life. The respondent lived with the appellant for six monthsand conceived during that period. The child was born in November 1967and the respondent remained at her parents' house for about one year.During that periond also the attitude and behaviour of the respondenttowards the appellant, his parents, brothers and sisters was cruel. Theappellant, however, tolerated the misbehaviour of the respondent in order tosafeguard the status and reputation of the family. After the birth of thechild, the respondent competely neglected the appellant and brought an end to the materimonial relations and obligations with the appellant. Thoughthe respondent lived with the appellant for about a year at Delhi after thedeath of the child her treatment towards the appellant was insulting and taunting. Thereafter the parties lived together at Delhi from November 197 8/05/1930. During this period, the behaviour of the respondentwas very cruel and inhuman towards the appellant. She had developed thehabit of abusing and cursing the appellant. Not only this, the respondentused to make remarks against the character of the appellant. The respondentdeclared that the appellant had illicit relations with his elder sister in spiteof the fact that the appellant respected and regarded his elder sister as hismother. The respondent also went to the extent of charging the appellanthaving illicit relations with the wife of the appellant's younger brother. Itis further alleged that whenever the appellant took out the respondent forshopping etc. she used to insult him and misbehaved in the presence of otherpersons. It is alleged that the misbehaviour of the respondent had reachedsuch a stage when it had become impossible for the appellant to live withher due to tension created in his mind.
(3.)Notice of the petition was issued to the respondent-wife. She wasduly served but did not put in appearance. However, from the record, Ifind that she had addressed a memorandum to the Court wherein she haddenied the allegations contained in the petition and had levelledcounter charges against the appellant. The said memorandum couldnot be taken into consideration and as such the respondent was proceededex parte.

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