RAM MEHAR SINGH Vs. URMILA KUMARI
LAWS(P&H)-2003-2-39
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on February 05,2003

RAM MEHAR SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
URMILA KUMARI Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

ANURADHA VS. ARVIND KUMAR [LAWS(P&H)-2014-11-504] [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

S.S.SARON, J. - (1.)RAM Mehar husband of Smt. Urmila Kumari has filed this appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Act') against the judgment and decree dated 9.2.1991 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (III), Rohtak, whereby his petition under Section 13 of the Act for the grant of a decree for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion has been dismissed with costs.
(2.)THE marriage between the parties was solemnized according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at village Sheikhpura, Tehsil and District Karnal on 2.7.1979. After the marriage the parties resided at village Khanpur Kalan, Tehsil Gohana, District Sonepat. Out of the wedlock, a daughter was born. The appellant filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act for grant of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion alleging that about six years earlier to the filing of the petition, the respondent on the pretext of participating in the marriage of her maternal cousin's daughter at village Bijewa, left his house leaving the daughter. She left with her maternal uncle Suraja and took away all her valuable clothes and ornaments. After about 20 days thereafter the father of the respondent reportedly made a demand of Rs. 50,000/- from the father of the appellant on the ground that he had entered into an agreement for the purchase of some agricultural land and he was short of money. The appellant's father expressed his inability to arrange the said amount, whereupon the father of the respondent got annoyed and left the house of the appellant expressing great resentment. It is further alleged that after about 2-1/2 months on coming to know that the respondent had reached her parental house went there to bring her. However, the parents of the respondent declined to send her as his father had not given financial help for purchasing the land. The respondent also showed her resentment. Efforts were made by the appellant, his father and other relatives and respectable which included Pandit Ganga Ram, Kehri Singh, Ujala and others, who all went to the house of the respondent to bring her back to the house of the appellant. However, the same proved futile. The appellant wanted to bring back the respondent after a week but he was given beating by the respondent and her uncles Maha Singh and Daya Singh and her brothers Jagbir Singh and Balwan Singh. The appellant sent a registered notice to the respondent on 15.7.1986 after the said incident. This enraged the family members of the respondent and they made several attempts to do away with the life of the appellant and for this purpose they made secret visits at odd hours to the village. However, the appellant was saved through providential grace and thus constrained to make complaints to the police apprehending great danger to his life. The matter came to such a stage that the respondent and her parents are in no way prepared to reconcile and thus the relations between the parties have totally broken down. In these circumstances, it has become well-nigh impossible for resumption of matrimonial relations between them. The appellant had earlier filed a petition for divorce but the same was dismissed in default. The respondent filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. where maintenance allowance for the respondent was granted by the Court in District Karnal. All these facts were indicative of a situation of complete breakdown and estrangement of relations between the parties.
The respondent appeared before the learned trial Court and filed her written statement. The averment with regard to the factum of marriage and the factum that a daughter was born out of the wedlock have been admitted. However, by way of preliminary objection, it was stated that the petition is an abuse of process of the Court and the same was filed on the basis of false, fabricated and frivolous allegations. Besides, the appellant had not come to the Court with clean hands and he had suppressed the material facts. As a matter of fact, it was he who had deserted the respondent of his own without any rhyme and reasons. The appellant and his parents are stated to be greedy persons and were persistently pressing their demand of a motor cycle. The appellant asked the respondent several times to get money for the purchase of motor cycle from her parents but the respondent showed her inability to bring money from her parents. Due to this reason the behaviour of the appellant and his family member became strange towards her. The appellant used to hurl abuses and gave severe beatings to the respondent. All the ornaments and valuable goods of the respondent were kept by the appellant and his parents. She was turned out of the matrimonial home in three clothes in June, 1987. It is further stated that the respondent was ready and willing to live with the appellant and she is not residing at her parental home by her own consent and will. Rather, it was the appellant who compelled her to leave the matrimonial home. The respondent in her written statement has repeatedly stated that she was willing to live with the appellant as she was a devoted wife. It is also stated that the appellant snatched away the baby Neelam from her custody and he never cared for her during her illness. Regarding dismissal of the petition for divorce in default, it is stated that the appellant was not ready to pay maintenance and so he withdrew the said petition. The fact that respondent had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance which was allowed, has been admitted. The other allegations made by the appellant have been denied.

(3.)ON the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the learned Court :-
1) Whether the petitioner is entitled to a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion ? OPP 2) Relief.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.