MAHINDER NARAIN J. (Oral)

( 1 ) THIS is a husbands appeal from a judgment dated 30th March. 1983, passed in Hindu Marriage Act case No. 383 of 1980. by the Additional District Judge, Delhi.

( 2 ) THE husband had filed a petition for decree of divorce under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 19-55. It was stated in the petition that a marriage between the parties was solemnized according to the Hindu rites on 31-1-1979. The marriage was a simple affair. The petition of the husband was found upon t. ie cruelty. Paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of the petition read as under :-

"6. That the behaviour of the respondent was not normal with the petitioner. She behaved in a very unto ward and abnormal manner with the petitioner and the members of his family. She would not do any of the house-hold duties and would complaint that after attending office, she was dead-tired. She also complained that she was not used to domestic chores as she had never worked in the home and declared that she would not do any house-hold work. Time and again the respondent would ask the petitioner to start residing separately Instead of residing with his parents and other family members. The petitioner fried to reason with her and told her that he was the eldest son in the family and could not dream of residing separately but the respondent would not hear the petitioner and would get angry. The respondent did not bother about the love and affection of the family members of the petitioner towards her.

7. That whenever the petitioner visited the house of the respondent i. e. his in-laws, they would advise him to ?tart residing separately adding that their daughter i. e. the respondent was not used to eside in such a congested family. The petitioner told them frankly that he was not prepared to live separately as his parents and other members of the family gave full love and affection to him and to the respondent. The respondent turned cold and blunt towards the petitioner and would not allow him to have sexual intercourse with her or to make love to her. The petitioner and all the members of his family gave all their love and affection to the respondent end treated her as a member of ther family but the respondent failed to appreciate the said gestures of the petitioner and the members of In s family.

8. That the respondent resided with the petitioner for a short period from 1-2-79 to 11-3-79, but she never allowed the petitioner to have sexual intercourse with her. Whenever he made an attempt, the respondent grew furious and told him that she was living in hell on account of the un-cooperative and repulsive behaviour of the petitioner. She would not show a positive response to the love and affection of the petitioner and his parents and on the other hand either she would lay cold or she would start shouting or screaming causing great mental torture, harasssment and humiliation to the. petitioner and the members of his family. Life became dry for the petitioner and he lost interest in life as well as the respondent on account of her bickering nature. "in reply to the averments made in paragraphs 6. 7 and 8, the fed in her written statement :--

"6. That para No. 6 of the petition is absolutely incorrect and false. It is false for the petitioner to say that the behaviour of the respondent was not normal towards the petitioner or that the respondent ever behaved in any abnormal maaner with the petitioner or with any other family member of the petitioner On the other hand, the behaviour of the petitioner and of his family members was very cruel and inluman towards the respondent. The respondent and his other family members many a times even physically tortured the respondent and gave her severe beaings It is false for the petitioner to say that the respondent ever told the petitioner or any other member of his family that she will not do any household duties or that she ever complained that she feels tired after attending her office and as such shewill not do any household

Click Here to Read the rest of this document