The judgment emphasizes the requirement for substantial evidence to prove mental cruelty and highlights that a spouse cannot take advantage of their own wrongs and plead desertion.

JUDGMENT :

Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.

1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the husband - Avtar Singh, against the judgment and decree dated 31st August, 2016, passed by the Ld. Addl. District Judge, Sirsa, (in short 'Ld. Court below'), vide which the petition filed by him, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), seeking dissolution of his marriage with the respondent-wife, was dismissed.

2. A few facts necessary for adjudication of the case, as pleaded in the petition filed by the appellant-husband (petitioner therein) before the Ld. Court below, may be noticed.

3. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 23rd February, 2008, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies as well as by way of Anand Karaj. It was a simple marriage sans any dowry. No child was born out of the said wedlock. The husband alleged that the wife was of a quarrelsome nature and hence, there remained continuous acrimony between them. The wife shirked her matrimonial duties and obligations. She would not cook food for him and was disrespectful not only to his parents but also him. She would pressurize the husband to move into a separate accommodation and when he would try to reason out with her, she would threaten to commit suicide. On 09th October, 2008, the wife left her matrimonial home. Thereafter, a petition under Section 9 was filed by the husband. All efforts made by the husband to bring about a reconciliation with the wife failed due to her obstinate behaviour. Further, he had to face false cases filed by the wife under the Domestic Violence Act. Hence, he prayed for dissolution of their marriage by way of decree of divorce.

4. Per contra, in the written statement filed before the Ld. Court below, the wife categorically refuted and denied all the allegations made by the husband in his petition. She submitted that their marriage was a lavish affair and her family had spent about Rs. 10.00 lakhs. Her parents in-laws were unhappy with the dowry given at the time of marriage and made demands of Rs. 2.00 lakhs and an Electric Generator set. Since she was unable to satisfy their demands, she was subjected to both mental and physical cruelty. She further submitted that the husband got her injected with a substance on the pretext that it was a vaccination. She later learnt that it was for aborting her pregnancy. The husband would repeatedly tell her that he would marry a girl from an affluent family so that he could get more dowry. She denied that she had ever left the matrimonial home on 09.10.2008 on her own. She alleged that she had been severely beaten up and thrown out from her matrimonial home after being told that she would not be allowed to set foot in the house unless and until she brought Rs. 2.00 lakhs and an Electric Generator set from her parents. She, thereafter, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act, as she wanted to live with her husband. All efforts to reconcile the matter proved futile due to her inability to meet their unjust demands. In the given facts and circumstances, she prayed for dismissal of the petition filed by the husband before the Ld. Court below.

5. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the Ld. Court below:-

"1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a decree of divorce on the grounds mentioned in the petition? OPP

2. Whether the petition is liable to be dismissed on the grounds mentioned in the written statement? OPR

3. Relief."

6. In order to prove their case, both the parties adduced evidence in support of their respective stands. The appellant-husband examined as many as three witnesses i.e. PW-1 Gurpal Singh, PW-2 Tarsem Singh and PW-3 Jagtar Singh. He himself stepped into witnesses-box as PW-4. On the other hand, appellant-wife examined herself as RW-1, besides, examining two other witnesses i.e. her brother Sukhpreet as RW-2 and Hargobind as RW-3 and closed her evidence.

7. After analyzing the evidence led by the parties, the Ld. Co