IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that concealment of material information before marriage, leading to mental agony and torture, constitutes cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The judgment also emphasizes the preponderance of probabilities as the standard of proof in matrimonial cases.

ORDER :

1. The appellant/wife has filed the present First Appeal (MAT) under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act being aggrieved with the judgment and decree dated 20-2-2023 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Pendraroad, Dist. Bilaspur in Civil Suit No 13-A/2020 by which the suit filed by the appellant/wife under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking decree of divorce and dissolution of marriage has been rejected.

2. The brief facts reflected from the record are that the plaintiff/wife filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the learned Additional District Judge, Pendraroad mainly contending that the appellant and respondent are governed by the Hindu Law. The marriage of the appellant/wife was solemnized forcefully with respondent/husband on 28-6-2020 at Nagar panchayat, Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa suppressing the fact that the respondent/husband is suffering Epilepsy where the parents of the appellant/wife have not performed the rituals of Kanyadhan. It has also been contended that one of the relatives of the father of the appellant namely Gorelal Gupta had fixed the date of marriage on 27-6-2020 and 28-6-2020. On 28-6-2020 when the ceremonial function was going on, they have also performed “Tilak” at 8.30 pm in the house of Anurag Keshwarwani/husband. When the marriage programme was going on, all of a sudden the face of the husband turned pale and his body started jerking with stiffness due to fits. When the parents of the appellant and guardians had discussed the issue with the respondent, the respondent, his father and elder father concealed the fact and started other rituals of the marriage. It has also been contended that at the time of performing of the rituals of the marriage, again the respondent developed the same symptoms of epilepsy, therefore, ceremonial function was stopped and the women relatives of the respondent started discussing the matter. The brother-in-law of the appellant along with 7-8 persons had rushed to the place of marriage who were in a drunken condition and they have forcefully completed the marriage and they were not allowed to move from that place. It has also been stated that she was mentally prepared that as soon as after marriage she will go to the house of the respondent and examine her husband at hospital available near to her residence. When she requested for providing medical facilities, behaviour of the family members of the respondent became deteriorated against her and immediately after 3 days of the marriage, in-laws of the appellant started teasing her by saying that their son is valued at Rs.20,00,000/- whereas she has given only 5 Tulas of gold whereas they have spent lot of money in the marriage and who will re-pay the same and asked her to bring Rs.12,50,000/- and 10 tulas of gold additionally, otherwise, she will be in difficult situation.

3. It has also been contended that due to illness of the respondent and torture given by the family members of the respondent, her matrimonial life was spoiled. The respondent and his family members refused her to send to her parental house for some function. She was also not allowed to move around the house and she was directed to remain stayed in the bedroom or in the kitchen only when it is required. It has also been contended that when her brother and family members used to visit to meet her at Nawagarh, then the respondent and his family members refused her to meet them so that the illness of the respondent cannot be known to public at large. Due to mental agony and torture, the physical relationship did not develop but she was compelled to have physical relation with respondent by the family members including her brother-in-law. He also abused her and she was not allowed to go to her parental house. It has also been alleged that the mobile phone of the appellant was kept by the brother-in-law of the appellant. The father-in-law of the appellant used to enter into her room