Gopal Singh, J. - (1.) THIS is appeal by Smt. Kusam Latta against her husband Hari Charan from the judgment of the District Judge, Karnal dated June (sic), 1970 allowing petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed on behalf of the husband against the wife, Facts leading to the appeal are as under: - The parties are residents of Karnal. They were married there on June 3, 1967. According to the allegations made by the husband in his petition filed on February 1, 1969, the wife withdrew from the society of the husband on November 20, 1968 on the pretext that she had to attend the betrothal ceremony of her brother at Delhi and in fact no betrothal ceremony was performed and it was at the instance of her parents that she left his house without any genuine reason. It is stated in that petition that she left the house in the absence of the husband and took away along with her jewellery, which belonged to the husband and which was in her possession apart from the jewellery of the mother of the husband. It is the case of the husband that after his wife left him, he approached her parents and requested them for her return to him. Before filing the petition the husband served a notice upon the father of the wife saying that she had left him without any just cause and that she be sent back to his house. The father of the wife replied that it is on account of his cruel treatment and his persistence to extract money from her parents that she had left the house.
(2.) THE petition of the husband was opposed by the wife on the ground that the husband treated her with cruelty, that he was a drunkard and a gambler, that be coerced her to squeeze money for him from her parents and that she had the apprehension of being done to death by him and consequently she left his house and started living with her parents. On the above pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed: - (1) Whether the respondent has withdrawn from the society of the petitioner without any reasonable cause? (2) Whether the respondent has been treated by the petitioner with so much cruelty that it would not be safe for her to live in his house?
(3.) EVIDENCE was led by the parties in support of these issues. The trial Court discussed both the issues together and gave the findings that the wife had withdrawn from the society of the husband without any reasonable cause and that the wife had not been treated by the husband with cruelty to render unsafe her living with the husband.;