Both the appeals were disposed of by the impugned order holding that the appellant wife herself was a defaulting party and neither the allegations of cruelty number of desertion were proved.
The grievance of the appellant wife is that the High Court was number justified in setting aside the findings of fact arrived at by the Family Court and that she had proved the existence of cruelty and desertion against the respondent.
The respondent also filed a petition seeking divorce and grant of other reliefs.
The respondent and his family members allegedly made further demands of Colour TV, Refrigerator and some other ornaments besides hard cash of Rs.10,000/ .
She also prayed for direction to the respondent to return her ornaments given to him at the time of marriage.
Both the husband and the wife preferred appeals against the order of the Family Court as the wife was number satisfied with the part of the order refusing to grant a decree in her favour in respect of properties claimed by her and the husband was aggrieved by the order of dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce.
The order passed under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act and for permanent alimony was also set aside.
On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed Whether the defendant has treated the petitioner with cruelty?
After 21st June, 1987 the parties started living separately.
The father of the appellant obliged the respondent by giving him Rs.10,000/ in the first week of June, 1987 but companyld number fulfil the other demands of his parents.
The appellant alleged that her parents spent more than Rs.80,000/ with respect to the ceremonies of the marriage and also gave several articles in the form of ornaments, valuables, cash and kind as per demand of the respondent.
The appellant was also granted a decree of Rs.12,000/ towards the price of the scooter, allegedly given at the time of the marriage and payment of Rs.500/ per month as permanent alimony.
It is companytended that as the appellant wife was proved to have been living separately, it was to be presumed that the respondent had deserted her.
The facts of the case giving rise to the filing of the present appeals are that marriage between the parties was solemnised on 6.5.1987.
The appellant had alleged that the respondent was having illicit relations with a lady residing in Gaya at Bihar with whom he was stated to have solemnised the marriage.
However, on 14.5.1996 the respondent filed an application for withdrawal of his matrimonial case which was allowed on 19.5.1996.
Aggrieved by the attitude of the respondent and his family members, the appellant states to have filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce along with prayer for the return of the property and grant of permanent alimony.
The Family Judge allowed the petition and dissolved the marriage of the parties on the ground of desertion by the husband.
The allegations made in the petition were denied by the respondent and it was stated that in fact the appellant wife was taking advantage of her own wrongs.
The appellant wife lived with the respondent husband till 21st June, 1987 and according to her the marriage between the parties was never companysummated.
The respondent and his family members were alleged to have started torturing the appellants on false pretexts.
If so, its effect?
SETHI,J. Alleging cruelty and desertion against the husband, the appellant wife approached the Matrimonial Court under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act hereinafter referred to as the Act praying for dissolution of her marriage with the respondent by a decree of divorce.
