Back
2021 Supreme(P&H) 1573
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Ritu Bahri, Archana Puri, JJ.
Smt.veena - Appellant
Versus
Shri Naveen - Respondent
FAO No. 1767-2017 (O&M)
Decided On : 23-09-2021
Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate, for the Appellant, Mr.Gaurav Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondent.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of matrimonial cruelty, the overall conduct of the parties, including filing false and defamatory complaints, should be considered to determine the existence of mental cruelty.
Headnote:
Cruelty - Hindu Marriage Act - Section 13 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court allowed the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of cruelty. The judgment referenced various legal provisions, including Sections 498-A, 406, 34 IPC, and the Domestic Violence Act. The court emphasized the importance of considering the overall conduct of the parties in cases of matrimonial cruelty.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty by the appellant-wife. The parties were married for less than three months, during which the wife filed multiple complaints and applications against the husband and his family members. The court found that the wife's conduct caused mental cruelty to the husband.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the wife's conduct, including filing false and defamatory complaints, amounted to mental cruelty to the husband. The court emphasized the importance of considering the overall conduct of the parties in cases of matrimonial cruelty.
Issues: The issues framed by the court included the entitlement to a decree of divorce, maintainability of the petition, concealment of material facts, and relief.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the overall conduct of the appellant-wife, including filing false and defamatory complaints, constituted mental cruelty to the husband, justifying the grant of divorce.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment allowing the divorce petition filed by the husband.
ORDER
Archana Puri, J. - Challenge in the present appeal, is to the judgment dated 08.02.2017 passed by learned District Judge, Family Court, Rohtak, whereby the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, filed by the respondent-husband was allowed, on the ground of cruelty.
2. Background facts in nutshell are as follows:-
3. Respondent-petitioner Naveen had filed a petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, thereby alleging that his marriage with Veena (appellant) was solemnized on 23.02.2012 at village Karor, District Rohtak as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. From their wedlock, one son namely Ansh was born. After marriage, Naveen and his family members gave full love and affection to Veena. However, Veena is a lady of quarrelsome nature. Just after the marriage, the family members of Veena started interfering in their matrimonial life. Veena was not happy to live in the joint family of Naveen, in the village and started pressuring him to arrange separate accommodation at Rohtak, far away from his parents. When Naveen showed his inability to arrange separate accommodation, Veena became annoyed and started extending threat to implicate Naveen and his family members, in a false dowry case. In order to pacify the matter, the parents of the Naveen, arranged a rental accommodation in Rohtak, so that Veena may live peacefully with Naveen. However, brothers of Veena started frequently visiting the house of Naveen and when he objected to the same, Veena became more arrogant and started causing cruelty, harassment and torture to him and his family members, on one pretext or the other.
4. On 07.04.2012, brothers of Veena came to the house of Naveen and without any reason, subjected Naveen and his father to merciless beatings. Veena used to visit her parental home, without prior permission or knowledge of Naveen. Whenever Naveen had tried to make her understand, she became annoyed and had also stated to Naveen that he has no right to interfere in her personal life. On 20.04.2012, Veena went to the house of her uncle, where Naveen was called and cousin brothers of Veena maltreated and gave merciless beatings to him, without any reason and turned him out from the house. On 05.05.2012, Veena's brothers came to the house of Naveen, in his absence and Veena left the house with all jewellery and ornaments, in the company of her brothers, without any permission of Naveen or his parents.
5. Veena lodged a complaint before CAW Cell, Rohtak on 02.02.2013 against Naveen and his family members. She also lodged an FIR No.92 of 2013 under Sections 406, 498-A, 34 IPC, at police Station Sampla, Rohtak against Naveen and his family members. On 29.03.2013, Veena came to the house of Naveen at village Kharkara, with her brothers and aunt with the help of Rajbir S/o Rampal and forcibly trespassed his house by breaking open the locks. Upon the receipt of this information, Naveen's father immediately reported the matter to police station Meham and got the locks opened of the property of Naveen's father except one room for living of Veena. In the first week of June 2013, Veena, her brothers and aunt tried to forcibly occupy the agricultural land of father of Naveen at village Kharkhara and the matter was reported to the Police Station Meham, and Veena, her brothers and aunt felt sorry, in writing in police station Meham and matter was compromised. Even, Veena had filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act against Naveen and his family members and also filed petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Due to the act and conduct of Veena, Naveen had suffered mental and physical cruelty, torture and harassment. As such, Naveen filed the petition for decree of divorce.
6. In pursuance to the notice issued, Veena (present appellant) made appearance and filed reply, wherein, the fact of marriage and birth of one son, from the said wedlock, as such, has not been disputed. However, it is averred that at the time of marriage, parents of Veena ha
