RAJESH BINDAL J. - (1.) THE wife is in appeal before this court against the judgment and decree dated 27.2.2009 of the learned court below whereby in a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, "the Act"), the husband has been granted a decree of divorce.
(2.) THE facts as are available on record are that the marriage of the parties was solemnised on 17.9.2004 according to Sikh rites at Ludhiana. The husband filed a petition for divorce on 25.2.2006. The plea raised was that after the marriage the wife did not reside with him. The marriage was consummated but no child was born out of the wedlock. At the time of marriage, the appellant was working as Information Officer in Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. After the marriage, she continued with her job and occasionally joined the company of the husband, who is residing at Mohali. She did not even resign from her job at Ludhiana or agree to join any service at Mohali or Chandigarh. She did not share with the husband as to how much was her salary and how much she was spending or saving. She was not obedient. Her conduct was always irritant. She caused mental harassment and agony to the husband. Her living apart and depriving the husband pleasure of matrimonial relations, was a constant source of mental torture. Maintaining secrecy, the wife got visa for UK and left on 23.7.2005 and since then she was not in contact with the husband and also did not disclose her place of residence or what she was doing there. After issuance of notice, the appellant wife filed reply to the petition under her signatures but as is evident from the evidence, she was not present in India at that time. While admitting the factum of marriage, she admitted that no child was born out of the wedlock but it was on account of the fault of the husband and his family members who got the pregnancy terminated. While denying the allegations regarding her service at Ludhiana or visit to Mohali, she stated that at the time of engagement, entire facts about her service and salary were disclosed. For the purpose of obtaining visa, the documents were got prepared by the husband himself. She was always obedient and performed her duties as a good Indian wife. To keep the matrimonial bonding, she used to visit Mohali thrice a week. The real problem, in fact, was that the husband and his family members were greedy persons and they used to harass and taunt her for not bringing sufficient dowry. On their pressure, her father had sent a cheque of ' 2 lacs, which was deposited in the joint account of the parties. Efforts were made to get a job near Mohali but the same did not yield any result. Her going to UK without the knowledge of the husband was denied by stating that the husband had got all documents prepared himself. In fact, the husband had gone to the Airport to see off the appellant. The telephone number given by her to the husband was misused by him by abusing and demanding dowry. Even the email address was also misused by writing the stuff which no normal person can read.
(3.) THE stand taken by the wife in the reply was denied by the husband in the replication filed and whatever stated in the petition, was reiterated.;