VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA,J. - (1.) Aggrieved of the judgment and order dated 8th October, 2007 the appellant has instituted the present appeal.
(2.) Briefly, the essential skeletal material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy are that non-appellant-wife- Smt. Santosh Devi, instituted an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short the "Act of 1955"), with a prayer for dissolution of her marriage with the appellant-husband that was solemnized on 3rd October, 1997. The non-appellant-wife in her application instituted on 31st August, 2005, pleaded that the appellant-husband and his family members subjected to cruelty for dowry. It is pleaded case of the non-appellant-wife that she was subjected to mental and physical torture. Further the appellant-husband was a drunkard. On account of serious matrimonial discord, she left the matrimonial home and resided with her parents since 8th July, 1998. Narrating the incident of 21st January, 1998, the non-appellant wife also alleged sexual harassment at the hands of the brother of her father-in-law.
(3.) From the materials available on record, it is also reflected that the appellant-husband has instituted an application under Section 9 of the Act of 1955, on 4th February, 2006 for restitution of conjugal rights stating that the non-appellant-wife raised issues out of minor differences of opinion. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the Court below consolidated both the proceedings on 8th January, 2007. On the basis of pleadings of the parties framed issues on 8th January, 2007, which reads thus; 1. Whether non-appellant-Madan Lal and his family members subjected the applicant-wife to cruelty for deficiency in dowry and whether the non-applicant-husband caused mental cruelty and as a result of intoxication? 2. Whether the applicant-wife prevented the non-appellant husband of the conjugal rights for which the proceedings were pending before the Court for restitution of conjugal rights. 3. Whether the applicant was of questionable character for she gave birth to a child just after six months of marriage? 4. Whether the appellant-wife instituted proceedings in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Laxmangarh, against the non-applicant-husband and his family members wherein they were acquitted? If yes, what its effect? 5. Relief ? ;