Both the companyrts have rejected the claim of the appellant herein on the ground that he has failed to prove cruelty sufficient for grant of a decree of divorce.
252 M of 2006 whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the appeal filed by him against the judgment and order dated 11.10.2006 of the Additional District Judge Ad hoc , Amritsar, dismissing the petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 hereinafter referred to as the Act for a decree of divorce against the respondent wife, who is working as a Librarian in Government Institute DIET at Verka, Amritsar on the ground of cruelty.
252 M of 2006.
She is living in her parental house for the last more than one year.
Since then, the respondent started insisting that she cannot live with the parents of the appellant who are mental and nuisance in her life and pressed upon the appellant to have a separate abode from his parents.
Heard Mr. Vinay Kumar Garg, learned companynsel for the appellant and Mr. Seeraj Bagga, learned companynsel for the respondent.
Though learned companynsel for the appellant attempted to argue desertion, in the absence of any plea evidence and material, we disallowed him to pursue the said point.
Hence, the necessity has been arisen to file the present petition Except the above allegations, the appellant has number highlighted any other instance s about cruelty by the respondent.
In the reply to the petition under Section 13 of the Act, the respondent has highlighted her stand and in fact denied all the allegations against her.
Questioning the above said orders, the appellant has filed the present appeal by way of special leave petition.
In para 10, the appellant has stated That on 10th May of 2002, the respondent left her matrimonial home without giving any information to any member and she also left her child in the matrimonial home this shows that the respondent did number have any love and affections towards petitioner and his family members.
In para 6 of the petition, the appellant has alleged that She called nuisance, idiot and mental to the parents of the petitioner and the respondent openly said that she did number want to live with the petitioner if he live with his old parents.
19 of 2003 before the Addl.
She also stated that in February 4, 2000, her parents gave Rs.
Even after the birth of the child, there was numberimprovement in the behaviour of the respondent.
She alleged that the appellant is a habitual drinker and used to threaten her to kill with poison.
She also alleged that the appellant is habitual of taking liquor and under influence of liquor, he used to beat her.
The stand of the Respondent In reply to the divorce petition, while denying all the averments made by the appellant, the respondent has stated that the appellant is a greedy person and number satisfied with the dowry articles received in marriage.
District Judge, Amritsar, praying for a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Act.
He always misbehaved and maltreated her and abused on several occasions.
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant approached the High Court by filing FAO No.
The case of the Appellant 2 a On 23.11.1997, the appellant got married with the respondent at Amritsar according to Sikh rites and customs.
On 15.05.1999, a male child was born out of the wedlock.
She started exhibiting short tempered behaviour and treated the parents of the appellant with cruelty and disrespect.
In the month of January 1998, on the first Lohri festival after their marriage, the respondent being annoyed with the appellant on a trivial issue, abused his mother in filthy language in the presence of their relatives and neighbours causing immense pain to the entire family.
50,000/ to the appellant and thereafter the appellant agreed to keep the respondent in her matrimonial home.
Apart from the above pleadings, both parties filed statement in the form of an affidavit petition and also let in evidence reiterating their respective pleas.
Decision of the District Court and High Court By judgment dated 11.10.2006, the Additional District Judge, Amritsar, after analyzing the plea of both the parties, oral and documentary evidence companycluded that the appellant husband failed to substantiate the allegations of cruelty and dismissed his divorce petition.
In the petition, the appellant has highlighted only one aspect, namely, that after the marriage, in the month of January 1998, on first festival of Lohri, when they were enjoying the festival, the respondent wife abused his mother and the father in the presence of relatives and neighbours.
She further alleged that the appellants maternal uncles daughter used to interfere in their family affairs.
Even on the date of marriage, the respondent had been working as a Librarian in a Government Institute DIET at Verka, Amristar.
She also highlighted that the appellant used to force her to bring cash from her parents as he wanted to purchase a car in the month of February 2000.
The learned single Judge of the High Court, by the impugned order dated 11.05.2007, while agreeing with the companyclusion of the Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant.
The father of the appellant is aged about 80 years and his mother is more than 75 years.
She always insisted that she being financially independent is number in need of the appellant and his family.
From the very beginning, the respondent expressed her dislike towards the appellant and his family and gradually started misbehaving with them.
When she refused to bring cash, she was mercilessly beaten by the appellant.
The only question for companysideration in this appeal is whether the appellant husband has made out a case for divorce on the ground of cruelty by the respondent wife.
The appellant having failed in his efforts to bring back the respondent to the matrimonial home and in view of the companysistent cruelty filed HMA Case No.
She also alleged that the appellant pulled her hair and gave merciless beatings in the presence of his parents.
She also projected her case that the custody of the child was forcibly taken by the appellant when she returned from her matrimonial home.
19 of 2003, the appellant had sought divorce merely mentioning Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce, and did number specify the grounds on which he is entitled to decree of divorce.
Though in the divorce petition filed before the Additional District Judge, Amritsar in HMA No.
Just five days before the third birthday of their child i.e. on 10.05.2002, the respondent, without any justifiable reason left the matrimonial home leaving the child unattended and went to her parents house and staying there since then.
As discussed earlier, the only instance highlighted by the appellant for divorce was that the respondent wife abused his parents on the day of festival of Lohri in the presence of relatives and neighbours.
Section 13 of the Act specifies the grounds on which a decree for divorce may be obtained by either party to the marriage.
Sathasivam, J. The appellant, a Principal in ITI College, Sirhali, Amritsar, has approached this Court against the judgment and final order dated 11.05.2007 of the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh in FAO No.
