R.L.ANAND, J. - (1.) KARNAIL Singh (husband) has filed the present appeal and it has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 1.10.1996 passed by learned District Judge, Bathinda, who allowed the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") filed by Sukhjit Kaur alias Bholo (wife) and passed a decree for dissolution of marriage.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that Sukhjit Kaur alias Bholo filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage against her husband Karnail Singh by inter-alia pleading that she was married to Karnail Singh about 7 years ago in Shergarhia, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan) and after the marriage they lived together at village Kothaguru, district Bathinda. Out of the wedlock two female children were born and both have expired. It is alleged by the petitioner-wife that soon after the marriage the appellant-husband started maltreating her on the ground that she had brought insufficient dowry, whereas her parents had spent sufficient amount at the time of marriage. The appellant-husband started making more demands of dowry which her parents could not meet. It was further alleged by the petitioner-wife that the appellant-husband was a truck driver. He is addicted to intoxicants and takes liquor daily. He put pressure upon her to bring Rs. 50,000/- from her parents to purchase a truck but her parents could not meet this illegal demand of the appellant. Thereafter she was turned out of her matrimonial home about 2-1/2 years prior to the filing of the petition in three plain cloths. She was given beatings and all the gold and valuables were retained by the appellant. About 15 days prior to the filing of the petition on 8.8.1995 a Panchayat consisting of the father of petitioner namely Darbara Singh, Bhagwan Singh, Thana Singh and Major Singh went to the appellant and requested him to rehabilitate the petitioner but he flatly refused to do so. It was also pleaded by the wife that her husband had deserted her for continuous period of more than two years prior to the filing of the petition. Notice of the petition was given to the appellant-husband, who filed reply and denied the allegations. He stated that his wife gave birth to a daughter on 18.9.1993, but she died on the same day in Dr. Balbir Singh's hospital in Bhagta Bhaika. On 21.7.1994 she gave birth to another female child at Kothaguru and she was attended by Manjit Kaur, a village Dai, but that child also expired. The husband denied the allegations of cruelty and stated that he never demanded dowry or money from the petitioner-wife. According to him, the brother of the petitioner died in June, 1993, but the parents of the petitioner refused to keep his widow, who then got married to some one in Jahanewali. Suba Singh, brother of the petitioner-wife was survived by two daughters. One of them was being brought up by the sister of the petitioner and the younger one namely Chhinder Kaur was brought by the petitioner, who started breast feeding her after the death of her first child. The appellant-husband tried to persuade the petitioner to send Chhinder Kaur back to her parents' house but she refused. According to the appellant, he never deserted the petitioner. Rather, she left her matrimonial home in July, 1995 and refused to return in spite of the efforts made through panchayat consisting of Bikkar Singh, Buta Singh, Balbir Singh and Natha Singh which went to her parents house on 17.9.1995. The petitioner and her parents told the panchayat that they will send the petitioner on the condition that the appellant-husband will not object of keeping of Chhinder Kaur and shall treat her like his own daughter. With this defence the appellant prayed for the dismissal of the petition.
(3.) FROM the pleadings of the parties, the learned trial Court framed the following issues :- "1. Whether the respondent has treated the petitioner with cruelty ? OPP 2. Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner for continuous period of more than two years preceding the presentation of the petition ? OPP 3. Relief." ;