JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Heard learned counsel for the
parties.
(2.) The marriage of the appellant and respondent
took place in the year 1979. They
lived together upto 21-2-1988. According to
the appellant, since the behaviour of the
respondent with appellant was not good
since time of marriage, there were usual
quarrels between the appellant and the respondent.
According to the appellant the
respondent used to go to her parents house
at Mandsore without taking permission of
the applicant and normally in absence of
the appellant. Because of this, there was
mental tension for appellant.
He tried to resolve the dispute raised by the respondent
but on 21-2-1988, when appellant was on
duty, the respondent left the house of the
appellant with her three children and went
to Mandsore. Since then the respondent is
living at Mandsore. The appellant tried his
best to bring back the respondent but he
failed in his efforts. According to the appellant,
the respondent's mother and father are
also not interested in sending the respondent to
the house of the appellant. Compelled by this situation,
the appellant submitted a petition under Section 9 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on 28-4-1989
which is registered as Case No. 76/89.
Despite that effort, the respondent did not come
to the appellant. According to the appellant,
respondent's father had one power loom factory
at Mandsore. The appellant's children
started working in that factory, therefore,
the respondent's parents to take benefit of
the situation, kept the respondent and
appellant's children so that the respondent's
parents can use the respondent and
appellant's children for earning. However,
admittedly the petition under Section 9 of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was withdrawn
by the appellant and thereafter, he
filed the present divorce petition under
Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
before the Court below. The appellant sought
decree for divorce on the ground of desertion
and mental cruelty and on the ground
that the respondent did not re-establish the
relations with the appellant despite filing of
the petition by the appellant under Section
9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on 28-4-1989.
(3.) The respondent-wife of the appellant
submitted reply to the divorce petition and
stated that their marriage took place in the
year 1979 and out of this wedlock, she gave
birth to two daughters and one son. She
admitted that upto 1986, she lived with the
appellant at Chittorgarh upto this period
there was no dispute between the appellant
and the respondent, before going to
chittorgarh, the appellant and respondent
were living at Udaipur because of the employment
of the appellant in the General
Hospital at Udaipur. After appellant's transfer from
Udaipur to chittorgarh, he developed illicit relation with one lady nurse
Nalini, who was also working in the General
Hospital at Chittorgarh. The appellant even
brought Nalini in the house and started living with her as husband and wife, which
was seriously opposed by the appellant and
because of this reason, the relation of the
appellant and respondent became unhappy.
The appellant started beating respondent
and started giving inhuman treatment to the
respondent. Initially the respondent tried to
bear with the situation but she could not
tolerate it. The respondent stated that in
case the appellant is ready to leave the said
lady Nalini, she is still ready to live with the
appellant. So far as the petition under
Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is
concerned, according to the respondent, that
petition was filed only to take benefit of the
legal provision and the appellant never
intended to keep the respondent with him.
Because of third persons' entry in the house
of the appellant and the respondent, the
situation compelled the respondent to live
separate from the appellant. It is submitted
that the respondent and his father and other
relations tried to persuade the appellant to
leave the nurse Nalini but all efforts failed.
The appellant even started beating his two
daughters and son also and, therefore, the
situation compelled her not to live with her husband.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.