Gurpreet Singh vs Varinder Kaur

Manjari Nehru Kaul, J

The instant appeal has been preferred by the husband â€" Gurpreet Singh to impugn the judgment and decree dated 29.09.2017 passed by Addl.

District Judge, Gurdaspur whereby his petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') was dismissed.

Few facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as pleaded in the petition filed by the appellant-husband before the learned Court below

may be noticed.

Marriage between the parties was solemnized on 14.12.2006 as per Sikh rites and ceremonies. A son namely Gurnoor was born out of the said

wedlock on 29.09.2010. The marriage was a simple one as a day prior to their marriage a cousin of the respondent-wife had expired. The respondent-

wife was of quarrelsome nature. The parents of the respondent-wife would continuously pressurize the appellant-husband to get some agricultural land

in village Jhinger Kalan as also some family agricultural land transferred in her name. After 2012 the behaviour of the respondent-wife worsened as

she would create ugly scenes in front of one and all and misbehave with the friends and relatives of the appellant-husband. So much so, after 2012

there had been no conjugal relations between the parties. In the year 2013, when the father of the appellant died and his mother came from USA to

perform his last rites, the respondent-wife misbehaved and insulted his mother in the presence of everyone. The respondent-wife refused to let the

appellant-husband spend any money on the knee replacement surgery which the mother was advised to undergo as a result of which a loan had to be

raised by the mother for getting the said surgery performed. The respondent-wife would often threaten that she would commit suicide and implicate

him and his family in false criminal cases. After his mother returned to USA in July 2014, again pressure was mounted on him by the respondent-wife

and his family to transfer the land of his deceased father in her name. Since he refused to accede to her demand, she refused to prepare meals for

him as a result of which he was left with no other option but to get his meals from the market. Many a times she locked the house at night and

resultantly he was compelled to spend the night outside the house in his car. He thus, prayed for dissolution of his marriage with respondent-wife as he

had been treated with mental curelty and deserted by her.

Per contra, the respondent-wife in her written statement filed before the Court below, refuted and denied the allegations of the appellant-husband.

She submitted that she never shirked her matrimonial duties nor did she ever misbehave with the appellant-husband or his family. She claimed that she

remained hospitalised at Jalandhar in 2012 on account of her serious illness. Rather, it was the appellant-husband, who neglected her and did not even

bother to take care of her during illness. So much so, it was her father, who paid for all her medical expenses. She alleged that from the very

beginning the appellant-husband and his family were unhappy with the dowry that she had got at the time of her marriage for which she would be

frequently taunted and harassed. There were repeated demands from her husband and his family to get cash amount of varying sums on one pretext

or the other and many a times her father did in fact oblige them by giving money. Yet their greed remain unsatiated. The appellant-husband was a big

landlord, who would lease his land on contract. He would remain idle as he was not employed anywhere. The appellant-husband would consume liquor

even during the day. She would stop him from doing so, which did not go down well with the appellant-husband. She nursed her mother-in-law after

her knee replacement surgery. However, in June, 2014 she along with her son were left at her parental home by the appellant-husband on the pretext

that he would come to take her back after 4-5 days. When he did not come to take her, her father along with the relatives took her and her son to the

matrimonial home where they all were humiliated by the appellant-husband and his family. Despite their request, they were not allowed to live with

them. Thereafter, with the intervention of the relatives and respectables she was brought back to the matrimonial home but the behaviour of the

appellant-husband and his family did not undergo any change. In fact it only worsened with the passage of time. She thus, prayed for dismissal of the

petition.

From the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the learned trial Court:

Whether respondent treated the petitioner on the ground of cruelty and desertion as alleged? OPP

If issue No.1 is proved then whether petitioner is entitled to decree of divorce under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act? OPP.

Relief.

Both the parties adduced evidence in support of their respective stands. The appellant-husband himself stepped into the witness box as PW-1 and

examined one other witness. On the other hand, respondent-wife stepped into the witness box as RW-1 and examined her father Sulakhan Singh as

RW-2.

On an analysis of the evidence led, the trial Court dismissed the petition filed by the appellant-husband by holding that the appellant-husband was

unable to prove desertion and cruelty by way of any cogent and convincing evidence against the respondent-wife.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and reappraised the evidence as well as other material available on record.

It would be pertinent to mention that during the pendency of the instant appeal, the parties were referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre of

this Court to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement, however, all efforts failed miserably. This court also interacted with the parties, but they

maintained their respective stands as taken before the court below. The appellant-husband reiterated his allegations against the respondent-wife. The

respondent-wife, who was present along with their son in the Court, stated that she was still willing to go back to the conjugal fold despite the

allegations levelled by the appellant-husband.

In the opinion of this Court, the allegations levelled by the appellant-husband cannot by any stretch of imagination fall within the ambit of cruelty. It

is a matter of record that the respondent-wife did not even file any criminal case or complaint against the appellant-husband ever since the relations

between them turned sour. Further, a perusal of the allegations levelled against the respondent-wife are not only vague and trivial in nature but come

across as being totally unfounded. The appellant-husband has levelled allegations against the respondent-wife, which are not supported by any cogent

much less convincing evidence. His conduct rather comes across as being cruel and unreasonable in levelling allegations against the respondent-wife

of not allowing him to have any physical relations with her during the period when she was ill and admittedly hospitalised. It is very apparent that the

appellant-husband is looking for excuses to get rid of the respondent-wife at any cost.

As a sequel to the above discussion, we do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned judgment dated 29.09.2017 passed by the court below,

which is well reasoned one.

Consequently, the present appeal being devoid of any merit stands dismissed.