Point of Law : In numerous cases, where a marriage is found to be a dead letter, the Court has exercised its extraordinary power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to bring an end to it.

JUDGMENT :

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.

The husband filed a petition for divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. Decree of divorce was granted by the learned District Judge on ground of desertion. Feeling aggrieved, wife has challenged the judgment and decree dissolving marriage between the parties.

2. Marriage between the parties was solemnized on 05.05.1995 according to Hindu rites and customs. Two sons were born to the parties from this wedlock on 01.06.2000 and 29.01.2002, respectively. On 15.07.2008, the respondent-husband moved for divorce alleging desertion and cruelty at the end of appellant-wife. Gist of his case was that appellant had been repeatedly withdrawing from the matrimonial society on one pretext or the other. At the time of marriage, the respondent was working at Panchkula (Haryana). The appellant-wife wanted him to work at Darlaghat. She used to go to her paternal home saying that she would live with the respondent only in case he starts working at Darlaghat. Under her persistent pressure, he left his stable job at Panchkula but could not succeed in getting new job at Darlaghat. The appellant-wife picked quarrels with the respondent-husband without any rhyme or reason. She was in habit of assaulting their minor children. The respondent-husband started running a shop at Batal-Ghati. The appellant-wife did not mend her ways. She practically lived in her paternal home leaving children with the respondent. She did not even attend the functions of their children at matrimonial home. The respondent-husband quoted several instances where intervention of Gram Panchayat was sought to resolve the issues between the parties. He further alleged that in the year 2001 with the intervention of Gram Panchayat, the appellant joined the company of the respondent, but thereafter again withdrew from his society. She hurled threats to involve the respondent and his family members in various cases. She also advanced threats of committing suicide as well as to cause harm to their children. The respondent-husband pleaded that in February, 2005 also, the appellant left her matrimonial home without any rhyme or reason. He sought intervention of Gram Panchayat on 21.02.2005 and 06.03.2005. The appellant-wife joined his society on 06.03.2005, but soon thereafter her behavior became abusive. She finally left her matrimonial house on 25.05.2005. She did not join respondent’s company thereafter despite intervention by the Gram Panchayat as well as efforts made by the respondent. While leaving respondent’s company, the appellant also left their children with the respondent. On the basis of above allegations, dissolution of marriage was prayed by the respondent-husband on count of cruelty and desertion.

3. The appellant-wife did not deny living separately from the respondent and their minor children ever since 25.05.2005. Her case, however, was that she had been working as an Anganwari Assistant. She had financially supported the respondent-husband by raising loan of Rs. 30,000/- to provide him a motor-cycle. She had also borne the expenses during delivery of couple’s children. She denied the allegations of abusive behavior, hurling threats to the respondent-husband or his family members, to commit suicide or to cause harm to the children. The appellant also stated that she used to stay in her matrimonial home in the absence of the respondent. The respondent-husband had failed to maintain her. Her in-laws used to check her movements regarding her visits to her parental home. She pleaded that the respondent used to taunt her for bringing insufficient dowry. The appellant-wife denied the allegations of desertion and cruelty and stated that she had shown her willingness to join respondent’s company. Prayer was made for dismissing the petition.

4. The parties led evidence in support of their pleadings. After considering entire material available on record, learned District Judge held that respondent-husband had been able to prove desertion by th