BEENA DEVI Vs. MADHU RAJ SINGH
LAWS(UTN)-2012-6-8
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on June 05,2012

BEENA DEVI Appellant
VERSUS
MADHU RAJ SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

PRAFULLA C.PANT, J. - (1.)
(2.) THIS appeal, preferred under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.8.2010 passed by the Additional Judge, Family Court, Rishikesh in Suit No.59 of 2009, whereby the said Court has allowed the Divorce Petition filed by the husband (present respondent) under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record. In brief, the facts of the case are that appellant Beena Devi got married to respondent Madhuraj Rawat on 23.1.2007, following the Hindu rites. It appears that after some period, the relations between the two got soured and the appellant started living in her parental house. The present respondent Madhuraj Rawat filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, stating that the appellant did not allow him to establish conjugal relations. It was also pleaded by the husband that he was subjected to cruelty at the hands of his wife. The present respondent also pleaded before the trial court that on 3.7.2009 and 5.7.2009, efforts were made for reconciliation but the appellant did not agree to stay with the present respondent. There is no issue born out of the wedlock.
(3.) THE appellant contested the petition and filed her written statement before the trial court in which she admitted the marriage with the present respondent, but denied other allegations. It was further pleaded by her that it was she who was subjected to cruelty and harassment in her in-laws house. It is also pleaded that the alleged compromise said to have been entered between the parties was got signed against the wishes of the appellant. The trial court, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, framed following issues: - A. "Whether the defendant is living separately from the petitioner since 3.8.2007 without any sufficient reason, and as such, on this ground, is the petitioner entitled to decree of divorce? B. Whether the respondent was subjected to cruelty at the hands of the petitioner (husband) for non- fulfillment of demand of dowry and is she living separately due to that reason? C. To what relief, if any, the petitioner is entitled?;


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