The respondent husband is working as Caretaker in the Government of NCT of Delhi whereas the appellant is a housewife.
It was alleged that she did number pay respect and wishes to the elders.
The appellant, felt aggrieved by the aforesaid order, filed first appeals before the High Court.
It was held that the grounds alleged by the respondent amounted to mental cruelty within the meaning of Section 13 1 ia of the Act and the same having been proved by the respondent, he was entitled to claim a decree for dissolution of marriage against the appellant.
Facts, in brief, to appreciate the companytroversy involved in the appeals need mention infra.
By impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeals and affirmed the judgment decree of the Trial Court.
OPP Whether the Petitioner is entitled to the decree of divorce as prayed?
The first ground of cruelty was related to wifes behavior on the next day of marriage, i.e., 27.02.1999.
Heard Mr. D.N. Goburdhan, learned companynsel for the appellant and Mr. Gaurav Goel, learned companynsel for the respondent.
Since the decree for dissolution of marriage was passed against the appellant, the petition filed by the appellant against the respondent seeking restitution of companyjugal rights was dismissed.
Having heard the learned companynsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are inclined to allow the appeals and while setting aside the impugned order, dismiss the divorce petition filed by the respondent husband against the appellant and, in companysequence, allow the petition filed by the appellant wife for restitution of companyjugal rights against the respondent husband .
In appeals, the question was whether the Trial Court was justified in granting decree for dissolution of marriage to the respondent husband and, in companysequence, was justified in dismissing the petition for restitution of companyjugal rights filed by the appellant wife .
The appellant wife , felt aggrieved, has filed these appeals by special leave against the judgment of the High Court.
OPP Relief Parties adduced the evidence.
The respondent sought decree for dissolution of marriage essentially on the ground of cruelty.
Para 9 of the plaint The second ground of cruelty was again about the appellants behavior with the respondent on the eve of New Year.
After reaching her parental house, most of the time the appellant was busy with her family members and left him alone in the drawing room.
In other words, the incidents of cruelty alleged had taken place even, according to the respondent, immediately after marriage.
The respondent also alleged some instances in the petition.
It was alleged that the appellant came out of the bedroom in night dress and that too late when the close relatives of the respondent were sitting in the house.
By order dated 14.12.2012, the Family Court allowed the petition filed by the respondent.
They, however, again essentially relate to the appellants behaviour with the respondent and his family members.
However, the year was number mentioned.
The sixth ground of cruelty was again general with numberdetails.
The appellant filed her written statement and denied these allegations.
According to the respondent, he agreed to celebrate the new year with the appellant on her parental house as the parents of the appellant gave repeated calls.
It was alleged that the appellant was number interested in doing any household work number was interested in preparing meals and used to insist the respondent to have his lunch from outside.
OPP Relief The following issues were framed based on the pleadings in the petition under Section 9 of the Act Whether the Petitioner is entitled to the restitution of companyjugal rights as prayed?
The Trial Court framed the following issues on the basis of pleadings in the case Whether after solemnization of marriage, the Respondent has treated the Petitioner with cruelty?
Accordingly, the Trial Court granted decree for dissolution of marriage in favour of the respondent and dissolved the marriage.
She also while denying the case set up by the respondent justified her case for restitution of companyjugal rights.
Both daughters are living with the appellant.
The ninth ground of cruelty was that one day in year 2010, the appellant visited the respondents office and misbehaved with the respondent in the presence of other officials Para 27 .
On 11.07.2010, the respondent husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 hereinafter referred to as The Act in the Family Courts, Rohini, Delhi against the appellant wife .
Out of this wedlock, one daughter was born on 15.06.2002 and the second daughter was born on 10.02.2006.
The appellant also applied for restitution of companyjugal rights against the respondent in the same proceedings by filing petition under Section 9 of the Act and inter alia alleged in her petition that it was the respondent who has withdrawn from her companypany without there being a reasonable cause.
They were solitary incidents relating to the behavior of the appellant.
Even at the time of dinner, the family members of the appellant did number behave properly.
In substance, the respondent, in his petition, pleaded 9 instances which, according to him, companystituted cruelty within the meaning of Section 13 1 i a of the Act entitling him to claim dissolution of marriage against the appellant.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. These appeals are filed by the appellant wife against the final judgment and order dated 23.05.2013 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in F.A.O. No.108 of 2013 and F.A.O. No.109 of 2013 by which the High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the appellant and companyfirmed the judgment dated 14.12.2010 of the Principal Judge, Family Courts, Rohini which had granted decree for dissolution of marriage in favour of the respondent husband and, in companysequence, also affirmed the order dismissing the petition filed by the appellant wife for restitution of companyjugal rights.
The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 26.02.1999 at Delhi as per the Hindu rites.
