Gokal Chand Mital. J. - (1.) The learned counsel for the husband has stated at the bar that the litigation expenses and the monthly maintenance upto Sept., 1983, has already been deposited in this Court, and the receipts of deposits were shown to the counsel for the respondent wife. Maintenance for the month of Oct., 1983 is the sum of Rs. 155 has been paid in cash by the learned counsel for the husband to the counsel for the wife in Court today.
(2.) The parties were married in June, 1972. It is admitted case of the parties that after June, 1975 they did not reside together. Husband's case is that even during the aforesaid period, the wife used to leave his company without his permission, as and when she liked and joined his company whenever she liked, whereas the wife's case was that she used to be given beatings as she was not good looking and well educated and used to be turned out of the house. On 10th April, 1981, the husband filed divorce petition on the ground of desertion and cruelty. The details of the cruelty mentioned as are that his sister was to be married and a day before the marriage, the wife got him and other members of the family arrested by filing a complaint to the police and this humiliated him in public. Some other incidents of beating his younger brother and sister have also been stated.
(3.) The wife contested the petition and pleaded that she was of dark complexion and studied upto 5th Class, whereas the husband was graduate and he did not like to keep her and used to give beating and turned her out. Her case was that when her husband's younger sister was going to be married, she was not invited and when she came to know of it, she of her own went to attend that marriage. On seeing her, husband gave her beating and turned her out of the house and for that reason she had lodged a complaint. On the contest of the pasties the following issues were framed:- 1. Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner's company without any reasonable excuse since the month of June, 1975 as alleged ? 2. Whether the treatment of the respondent towards the petitioner has been cruel ? OPP 3. Whether the petition has been filed after unnecessary delay and if so, its effect ? OPP 4 . Relief After the evidence was led by judgment dated 5th Oct., 1982 the Court below came to the conclusion that it was the husband who was guilty of not keeping the wife probably for the reason that she was of dark complexion, not good looking and was educated upto 5th class only whereas the husband was good looking and was graduate and was employed in the Food and Supplies Department. The allegations of cruelty levelled by the husband were held not to have been proved. It was further held that the petition was unduly delayed because according to the respondent after June, 1975 they had not resided, whereas the petition was filed about 6 years thereafter. This is husband's appeal.;