SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA Vs. BRIJ BALA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the husband. He claimed in the Court below divorce from his wife mainly on the ground of cruelty. Having remained unsuccessful, he has approached this Court reiterating his claim.

(2.) AS averred by the Petitioner -appellant Subhash Chander Gupta, he was married to Brij Bala Respondent on 27.11.1977. At that time he was posted as a Patwari in District Bhiwani. The Respondent was posted as a teacher in district Kurukshetra. They lived in the first instance in district Bhiwani and then shifted to Kurukshetra taking a house on rent. A daughter was born out of the wed -lock. But while the wife was pregnant, there arose differences between them. The past life of the wife allegedly cast a shadow on their relation. It was alleged that she by birth was a Bania Mahajan but had been married of by Raj Kishen Verma Respondent No. 2 avowing himself to be her adoptive father. Since at Kurukshetra, the wife had left her matrimonial home and started living with Respondent No. 2, the Petitioner suspected that she had gone to resume illicit intimacy, as before, with her adoptive father This was projected as an instance of mental cruelty. Besides that, after walking out of the matrimonial home, she had lodged statedly a false complaint against the Appellant under Section 107/151 Code of Criminal Procedure before an Executive Magistrate. The allegation therein made by the wife was that she had been throttled by the husband for not meeting his demand of getting money from Respondent No. 2 to be spent on the marriage of the brother of the Appellant. The Appellant was required to execute a security bond for three months by the Executive Magistrate The order, however, was set aside by the Court of Session. This is termed as the second instance of cruelty. Furthermore, it was alleged that she had falsely accused the Appellant of having married a second time. The complaint in that regard made by her to his department was meant to get him dismissed from service. This attempt allegedly amounted to cruelty and was the third instance.

(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, as many as 9 issues were framed but the crucial ones were issues Nos. 1 to 4. They being inter -connected were dealt with by the trial Court together. Though they pertained to the claim of the Petitioner for divorce on account of desertion and adultery as well, but the Petitioner veered round to project his case solely on the ground of cruely. The evidence led by the Petitioner to further his case on the basis of cruelty depended on his own statement as P.W -3 as also documentary evidence of the previous litigation Similarly, the evidence in defence in that regard by the Respondents pertained to their own statements as RWs 2 and 3 as also documentary evidence in the form of pleadings incases afore -referred. The learned trial Court in a long and exhaustive judgment concluded in paragraph 15 thereof that in his opinion the Petitioner had failed to prove that Respondent No. 1 had treated him with cruelty.