I.S.TIWANA , J. - (1.) THE marital tie between the parties stand severed by the impugned decree of divorce granted against the Appellant -husband on the ground that he has been cruel to his wife -respondent. The facts which are not in dispute are as follows;
(2.) THE parties to the litigation were married on 3rd December, 1967, and have no issue. At the time of marriage, the Appellant a widower, was an Assistant Sub -Inspector in the Punjab Police and was posted at Phillaur Gurbachan Kaur, Respondent No. 2, who was also arrayed as a Respondent in the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (for short, the Act) is an elder sister of Rattanjit Kaur, wife of the Appellant, and was married to one Rur Singh. This Rur Singh was a Constable in the Police and at the time of the marriage of the parties used to reside with his wife Gurbachan Kaur at Phillaur. At that time, the Appellant was also living with them. Rur Singh is the brother of the deceased wife of the Appellant.
(3.) THE case of the Respondent -wife is that sometimes after the marriage she was surprised to know that Appellant was a widower and had grown -up children. This fact, according to her, was neither disclosed to her or her family members at the time of her marriage when she was only about 17 years of age nor was she otherwise aware of it. During the short interregnum of three or four months she stayed with the Appellant at Phillaur, she also came to know that the Appellant was having an illicit affair with Gurbachan Kaur Respondent and she even claims to have seen them sharing a bed. When she protested to the Appellant on account of the above -noted two facts, i.e., the non -disclosure of the off -springs of the previous marriage and the illicit liaison with her elder sister Gurbachan Kaur she was given a thrashing and was turned out of the house. It is also pleaded on her behalf that her as well as her parents' efforts to dissuade the Appellant from the above -noted illicit relationship with Gurbachan Kaur remained unsuccessful and, this, she was left with no other option but to file the present proceedings under Section 13 of the Act for a decree of divorce As already indicated, the trial Court (Additional District Judge, Amritsar) has found the claim of the Respondent -wife to be wholly truthful and has granted the impugned decree. Having heard the Learned Counsel for the parties at some length I find no merit in the appeal. Besides the positive evidence of A.W. -2 Kartar Singh, a retired Captain; A.W. 3 Tarlok Singh, A.W. 4 Gurbachan Singh and A.W. 5 Jaswant Singh, a brother of the two sisters, i.e. Ranjit Kaur and Gurbachan Kaur, I find that there are irrefutable circumstances which lend support to the assertions made on behalf of the Respondent -wife To my mind, the first such circumstance is that incase she had to cook up a story of Appellant's illicit relationship with a woman to highlight it as an act of cruelty towards her and for ultimately seeking a decree of divorce she would not have involved her own sister in that affair The very fact that she has levelled allegations or involved her sister in the whole sordid affair lends assurance to the fact that she is truthful and forthright. Besides this, this stand of her is fully supported by Jaswant Singh who as already pointed out, is a brother of Gurbachan Kaur. According to this witness, as soon as Respondent Rattanjit Kaur withdrew from the company of the Appellant after about three/four months of the marriage she made it known to her family members including him that the Appellant was carrying on with her sister Gurbachan Kaur. Similarly, the other witnesses have also deposed to the effect that on being contacted by them in the form of a Panchayat, the Appellant bluntly declined to mend his ways. They have also supported the version of the wife that prior to her marriage they were not aware of the Appellant having five children from his earlier wife. The evidence of Jaswant Singh. A.W. 5 is categorical in this regard that he and his family members including Rattanjit Kaur were never made aware of the fact that the Appellant was having five grown -up children from his deceased wife when he married Rattanjit Kaur. Undoubtedly, the onus of this issue that the Respondent -wife was not aware of the factum of the existence of the children at the time of her marriage is on her but the onus being of a negative nature she could not lead any better evidence than that has been produced in the case. The Appellant has all through imputed knowledge of that fact to the Respondent and her family members but has failed to lead any convincing evidence in support of the same. According to him, it was one Gurdit Singh who was a go between or had brought about this marriage but he has not been produced to support this fact. It deserves to be highlighted here that Gurbachan Kaur who has all through been arrayed as a party to this litigation has not chosen to contest the same either by filing a Written Statement or by appearing as a witness in the trial Court. Had there been no truth in the allegations of the Respondent -wife she would not have easily swallowed the allegations levelled against her own character.;