Major Bishan Dass vs Santosh Pawa

V.K. Jhanji, J.—This appeal is directed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Patiala, whereby the petition filed by the appellant for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce u/s 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was dismissed.

The marriage between the patties was solemnised on 26-1-1970 at Saharanpur. Out of the wedlock, a daughter namely, Anuradha was born on 5-8-1971. The petition for divorce was filed by the husband (appellant herein) in September, 1987 on the ground of cruelty. The petition, on contest, was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Patiala vide order dated 5-9-1989. The said judgment is being impugned by the husband in (his appeal.

Mr. Arun Nehra, Advocate, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant has conclusively proved on record that the wife made unfounded accusations which to her knowledge were false, and therefore the appellant is entitled to a decree of divorce on (he ground of cruelty.

On the other hand, Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the Additional District Judge, Patiala has taken into consideration the entire evidence on record including the statements of the witnesses and on appreciation of evidence, the petition of the husband was rightly dismissed.

After bearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, I find no merit in the appeal. The husband has given certain instances of cruelty in his petition. The said instances can be summarised in two categories :-

(i) Unfounded allegations made by the wife of demand of dowry by the husband;

(ii) Malicious charges by the wife against (be husband that he had contracted a second marriage and was living in adultery.

The husband has also stated in his petition that the wife bad been levelling these allegations against him and bad been tiling false complaints with (be Army Authorities, which not only made his life miserable, but also proved injurious to his health, body and mind. The wife, in her written statement, denied the allegations made in the petition tiled by the husband. She, of course, stated that on occasions, she brought the matter to the notice of the Army Authorities regarding mat-treatment and cruelly meted out to her by her husband. The husband has given certain instances of cruelty starting from the year 1980 till the riling of the petition. At the time of filing the petition, the husband was serving as a Major in the Indian Army. The wife made complaints in writing to the Army Authorities and such complaints are Exhibits PD, PG, PH/3 and P-7. In all these complaints, the wife complained to the Army Authorities that her husband beat her many times. She also complained that her husband made no provision for her maintenance as well as for the maintenance of her child. She also alleged in the complaints that be had re-married another woman at Bareily and is residing there. She also stated (hat he threatened that in case she does not give divorce by mutual consent, she as well as her daughter would be thrown out of the house.'' The husband, while appearing as PW-4, though reiterated what he had stated in his statement, yet in cross-examination, he admitted that so long his daughter remained with the wife, he did not send her any money. He also admitted that he never sent any money to the wife or to the daughter as he used to reside with them. He also admitted that his daughter is studying in a College but he stated that be does not know how much is the fee or what was the amount paid at the time of admission to the next class. Wife, while appearing as RW-I, gave instances of mal-treatment. In her cross-examination, she denied the suggestion that the husband never gave heatings to her. She rather stated that whenever be gave beating to her or to the daughter, she made complaints to the Army Authorities. She also examined Col. B.P.S. Deol who at one time was the immediate boss of her husband. Col. Deol stated in his statement that he allowed her (respondent) to stay in his house when she was turned out of her matrimonial home. He also stated that in the third week of February, 1986, when she was thrown out of her house again, she came to him and told (hat her husband was misbehaving with her. On this, he called her husband and enquired from him as to why he was misbehaving with his wife again. On his asking, the husband firstly denied the allegations made against him by his wife but when he was told that he himself would investigate into the allegations and for such kind of behaviour, if proved, he can be court-martialled. On this, the husband asked him to pardon him. He also requested for a compromise. Col. Deol got the compromise effected between the parties. Tarlochan Singh, Telephone Supervisor, Telephone Exchange, Patiala was examined as RW-4. He, in his statement, stated that the wife is employed in their office as a Telephone Operator. In April, 1980, when she was on duty, the husband came to the office and exchanged hot words and beat her in his presence. He also proved on record certain complaints which were filed by the husband against his wife in the department. Copies of the complaints are Exhibits RW-4/1 to RW-4/6.

From a reading of various documents on record including the statements of the witnesses, I am of (be view that the husband has miserably failed to prove that the wife ever treated him with cruelty. As a matter of fact, fault lies squarely with the husband. Right from the beginning of the married life, he started levelling false allegations against his wife. This is clear from his complaint, Ex. RW-4/5 dated 24-9-1986 made to the Divisional Engineer, Telegraphs, Patiala Division, Patiala in which he alleged that his wife Smt. Santosh Pahwa, during his absence, developed illicit relations with some one and became pregnant. He also alleged that she got the abortion done and submitted a certificate to that effect to the department. He wanted the department to take action against his wife. Copies of this complaint were also sent to the Accounts Officer, Telephone Exchange, Assistant Engineer Telephone, Director, Telecom., Assistant Engineer (Auto), Patiala, General Manager (North Zone), Ambala Cantt. and S.D.O. Telephones, Saharanpur. In another complaint, Ex. RW-4/6 made to the Divisional Engineer, Telegraphs, the husband alleged that his wife is making frequent private telephone calls to Delhi, Saharanpur, Mandi Gobindgarh and Nabha on certain telephone numbers as given in the complaint. In another complaint, Ex. RW-4/7, he complained that his wife is in illegal possession of his house and has been claiming house rent from the department which she was not entitled to. The allegations made in these complaints clearly point out that the husband has been making false complaints to the department where his wife was working. Apart from this, the husband has admitted that he never sent any money for the maintenance of his wife as well as his daughter. In these circumstances, if the wife had made certain complaints to the Army Authorities bringing to its notice the mal-treatment and cruelty meted out to her at the hands of her husband, it would give no cause to the husband to seek divorce. So far as the allegation of the wife that her husband has contracted a second marriage is concerned, I find that though the wife, on record, has not been able to prove the same. yet evidence on record proves the apprehension of the wife. Exhibit PW-6 is a complaint made by Smt. Santosh Pahwa to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow in which she brought to the notice of the SS.P., that her husband kept one lady, named Usha daughter of Laxmi Narain Pandey, House No. 633, Street No. 9, Rajinder Nagar, Lucknow and is living with her at the place of his posting. She in her complaint asked him to make au enquiry as her husband was not entitled to contract a second marriage during the subsistence of first marriage. She made a similar complaint, Ex. PW-6/A to the Inspector Incharge of the concerned Police Station. The S.I. of the said Police Station made enquiries and submitted his report, Ex. PW-6/B. In his report, be stated that Major Bishan Dass got married to one Usha Pandey daughter of Laxmi Narain Pandey and they had been staying together for a year and half. In the presence of this report, the husband cannot make a grievance that the allegations were false to the knowledge of the wife. Thus, in my view the finding recorded by the Additional District Judge, Patiala that the appellant has completely failed to prove the charge of cruelty, is perfectly sound and calls for no interference by this Court.

In all fairness to counsel for the appellant, I may notice the decisions cited by him i.e. (i) Harbhajan Singh Monga Vs. Amarjeet Kaur, , (ii) M.K. Malhotra v. Smt. Kirti Malhotra AIR 1987 Del 266 , (iii) Smt. Aruna Jalan Vs. Capt. (now Major) Ramesh Chand Jalan, and (iv) Kiran Mandal Vs. Smt. Mohini Mandal, . A reading of these authorities would show that they are clearly distinguishable and have no bearing on the facts of the present case.

For the reasons recorded above, I find no merit in the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed with costs which are quantified at Rs. 1,000/-.