BIJENDER SINGH Vs. NARESH KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 18.04.2017 passed in a petition filed by the appellant/husband under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred as "HMA") seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. The petition has been dismissed by the Family Court which has led to the filing of the present appeal.

(2.) The brief facts of the case necessary to decide the present appeal are that the marriage between the parties was solemnised on 09.02.2007 as per Hindu rights and ceremonies. No child was born out of their wedlock. Both the parties have been residing separately since 06.02.2013.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the judgment of the Family Court is contrary to law and thus, liable to be set aside. It is contended that the findings of the Family Court are based on conjectures and surmises and the petition seeking decree of divorce should have been allowed on the ground of cruelty on the appellant/husband and his family members. Counsel further contends that the learned Family Court has completely lost track of the fact that the behaviour and the conduct of the respondent/wife during her stay in the matrimonial home was non-cooperative with the appellant/husband and his family members. Learned counsel highlights the fact that the respondent/wife had filed a false and frivolous complaint against the appellant herein at the CAW Cell leveling false allegations against him with a view to pressurize the appellant/husband and his family members and to extort money from them. Counsel contends that a false FIR was registered against the appellant/husband and his family members which would tantamount to cruelty. It is contended that the Family Court has overlooked the grievances of the appellant/husband and the cruelties inflicted by the respondent/wife on the appellant/husband and his family members. Learned counsel also submits that the Family Court has wrongly reached to the conclusion that leaving of the respondent/wife from the matrimonial home without any cause or reason would not amount to cruelty as it is held that it would be improbable that the respondent/wife would have left the matrimonial without any rhyme or reason. Learned counsel also contends that the FIR arising out of the complaint made by the respondent/wife under Sections 498A/406/506 of IPC registered at PS Beri, Jhajjar, Haryana has been closed and the appellant and the members of his family have been discharged and this would be a sufficient ground to allow this appeal and set aside the order of the Family Court.