Smt. Shanti Maru @APPELLANT@Hash Vishal Maru

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Trial Court record has been perused.

Vide judgment dated 31.5.2016, the petition filed by the respondent has been allowed granting decree of divorce to the respondent on two counts.

Proof of cruelty. Desertion for over two years preceding filing of the petition without any justifiable cause. 3. Marriage between the parties was

solemnized as per Hindu customs on 23.11.2010. No child has been born to the couple.

As per the respondent attitude of the appellant in the matrimonial house was normal for a period of one month. But after that she started quarrelling

with his parents. She fought with him and his family members in December, 2011. Her parents were informed. Her father came to the matrimonial

house and the appellant left the matrimonial house in the company of her father. When the respondent contacted the appellant she said that she would

live with him if he took up separate residence. He was thus forced to take separate residence on rent. She fought with him in the said rented house

and left him on 24.6.2012. He filed a petition on 14.9.2012 seeking restitution of conjugal rights. The appellant could not be served. He therefore

withdrew the petition because he learnt that on 23.9.2012 she had lodged a complaint pursuant whereof FIR for offences punishable under Sections

498A, 323, 504 IPC was registered.

We note that the petition seeking divorce was filed by the respondent in July, 2014.

The appellant denied the assertions made against her in the petition seeking divorce filed by the respondent. She pleaded that she was constantly

harassed for dowry and was beaten in the month of May, 2011 due to which she suffered a miscarriage on 5.5.2011. She pleaded that since her in-

laws would always trouble her and threw her out of the house her husband i.e. respondent was constraint to take a house on rent but in said rented

house her husband did not even give food to her. She pleaded that the respondent was prone to alcohol and whatever he would earn would be spent

on liquor. He would not pay the rent on time. For days he would be missing from the house. She pleaded that she was forced to move to her

parents’ house because the landlord compelled the respondent to vacate the rented accommodation on account of rent not being paid.

On the pleadings of the parties two issues were settled. The first was whether the appellant committed acts of cruelty against the respondent and

the second whether the appellant withdrew from the consortium for a period of two years preceding filing of the petition without any sufficient cause.

Record shows that the respondent examined himself as AW1, his mother Vidhya Devi as AW2, his brother Shelja as AW3 and one Uma Sharma

as AW4. He proved 15 documents as Ex.1 to Ex.15.

The appellant examined herself as NAW1, her sister Kokila as NAW2 and her mother Narbada as NAW3.

The testimony of the respondent and his witnesses, and in particular concerning the date 5.5.2011 i.e. the date when appellant claims to have

suffered an abortion on account of beating given to her, through the medium of Ex.P/1, P/8 and P/10 brings out that respondent’s father was

admitted at the Railway Hospital, Jaipur in a serious condition on 15.3.2011. He was discharged from the hospital on 2.4.2011. He was re-admitted on

4.4.2011 at Fortis Escort Hospital, Jaipur. Ex.P/8 brings out that even respondent’s mother was admitted at the Railway Hospital, Jaipur on

4.5.2011 wherefrom she was discharged on 11.5.2011.

The learned Judge, Family Court has opined from said evidence that appellant’s assertion that she was ill-treated in her matrimonial house and

so severe was the ill-treatment that she aborted is disproved. We shall comment upon this evidence a little later.

Concerning the appellant, she claims in her testimony that on 5.5.2011 abortion took place at JP Hospital, Udaipur. On being cross-examined she

admitted that she had no document to prove the same. She admitted that for experience she had worked at the said hospital i.e. JP Hospital. To the

question that JP Hospital was an orthopedic hospital she replied that she does not know.

From said testimony of the appellant the learned Judge, Family Court has opined that this is an additional reason to hold that her version of forced

abortion was false.

Concerning appellant’s leaving the rented house where the couple had set up their matrimonial home, during crossexamination the appellant

admitted that she and her husband resided in the rented house and that her husband left the house informing her that to undergo training he had to go

to Gurgaon. She stated that she was forced to leave the house because a snake entered the house due to rain during monsoon period. She stated that

she left the house to live with her parents informing the respondent that when he returns he should contact her and she would return. As per her the

respondent never contacted her.

We need not note the testimony of the witnesses for the reason, as usual in matrimonial cases witnesses of the parties parrot the case of the party

who produces them as witnesses.

From the facts and the evidence noted hereinabove we expected from learned counsel for the appellant to address arguments on the evidence

concerning appellant’s plea of being beaten in her matrimonial house and as a result whereof she suffered a forced abortion on 5.5.2011. The

contours of the evidence has been noted by us hereinabove.

Learned counsel for the appellant makes no submissions concerning said evidence and the conclusions which one needs to draw therefrom.

Indeed, the appellant has no proof of having undergone an abortion at the JP Hospital, Udaipur. Her admission that she had worked in the said

hospital does not justify her answer during cross-examination that she cannot affirm or deny whether the hospital was an orthopedic hospital. The

medical papers concerning respondent’s parents establish that both parents were seriously unwell and were admitted in different hospitals in the

city of Jaipur and respondent’s version that on 5.5.2011 he was in Jaipur gets substantiated therefrom.

Now, a false allegation that so severely was the spouse beaten by the other spouse that she aborted, if proved to be false would itself constitute an

act of cruelty.

That the respondent separated from his parents, as admitted by the appellant herself, lends credence to respondent’s version that he was

compelled to take up separate residence due to the hostile attitude of the appellant towards his parents.

As per the appellant, as pleaded by her the landlord forced her to vacate rented house because the respondent did not pay the rent is bellied

from her testimony wherein she says that the reason for leaving the house was a snake entering the house during monsoon period when her husband

was in Gurgaon for purpose of training. The appellant has not been able to render any explanation for deserting the matrimonial house. The factum of

desertion is admitted. The reasonable cause had to be established by the appellant but she has failed to do so.

We note at this stage that learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to puncture any hole in the appreciation of the evidence by the

learned Judge, Family Court and the impugned decision proceeds on the evidence noted by us hereinabove. We find no infirmity in the impugned

judgment.

The appeal is dismissed.

No costs.