The main legal point established in the judgment is that false and defamatory complaints made by a party against the spouse or his/her family amount to cruelty, and the concept of irretrievable breakdown of marriage can be considered as a ground for divorce.

JUDGMENT

Nidhi Gupta, J. - This appeal has been filed by the husband against the order dated 8.5.2017 passed by the Additional District Judge, Patiala whereby his petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (hereinafter 'the Act'), seeking dissolution of his marriage with the respondent on the ground of cruelty and desertion has been dismissed.

2. Briefly stated the facts are that the parties were married according to Sikh rites and ceremonies at Ludhiana on 11.11.2012. After marriage they cohabited together as husband and wife. No child was born of this wedlock. It is appellant's case that soon after their marriage the respondent started pressurising him to leave his job as C.O., Dental Centre, Air Force Station, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh so as to settle in Patiala where her parental home was. She is stated to be dominating and disrespectful to him and his family and picked up quarrel for no reasons. She is also stated to have physically assaulted the petitioner at times and misbehaved with him and insulted him in the presence of his relatives and friends. It is further alleged that the respondent frequently behaved offensively and arrogantly using bad language, and would lock herself up in her room for hours threatening to do something drastic and implicate the appellant in criminal case involving non-bailable offences. Appellant states that this caused him great mental tension and agony. It is averred that to please the respondent the appellant also brought her to her parental home on Lohri soon after their marriage in the month of April 2013, as the respondent preferred to stay mostly in her parental home. He brought her back on 24.4.2013. The appellant was transferred from Gorakhpur to Udhampur on 28.8.2013 and was to join on 5.9.2013. During this period while they were staying at the appellant's parents' house the respondent left from there on 1.9.2013 without any reasonable cause and she took away all her dowry articles including the ones given to her by the appellant's parents and she did not join the appellant's company thereafter though he requested and pleaded with her several times. Accordingly it was pleaded that the respondent had deserted the appellant.

3. On the other hand, respondent denied all the allegations and stated that in fact she had been deserted by the appellant. She stated that prior to her marriage she had worked as Ayurvedic Medical Officer for four years in the State Health Department.

4. However, she had been forced by the appellant to leave her Government job. She further states that after marriage she moved to Gorakhpur with her husband but soon thereafter he started torturing her and making illegal demand of dowry and would beat her mercilessly and never paid any maintenance to her because of which she had to seek monetary help from her parents. Respondent further states that the appellant constantly mocked her abusively for bringing inadequate dowry and made her work as domestic help and would lock her in room for hours together. It is further stated that in April 2013 respondent was sent to her parental home for a long time and was brought back to Ludhiana on 24.4.2013 to attend the engagement ceremony of the appellant's cousin which was scheduled for 27.4.2013. She further states that appellant's parents visited Gorakhpur in July 2013. Thereafter prior to appellant's transfer from Gorakhpur to Udhampur they stayed in the appellant's parents' home and that on 1.9.2013 the appellant along with his parents threw the respondent out of the matrimonial home and appellant flatly refused to take her with him to Udhampur. Eventually the respondent was constrained to approach the police authorities and registered case under Section 406/ 498-A, 377 IPC against the appellant.

5. The appellant filed replication before the trial Court controverting the abovesaid allegations of the respondent and stated that the respondent had filed innumerable false complaints against the appellant and his family