JUDGMENT :

Sudhir Singh, J.

The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 09.03.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Patiala (for short 'the trial Court'), whereby the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for brevity 'the Act') filed by the appellant-wife for dissolution of marriage, has been dismissed.

2. The aforesaid petition had been filed by the appellant-wife, inter-alia, pleading therein that her marriage with the respondent-husband was solemnised on 08.03.1996 as per Hindu rites. Out of the said wedlock, two children were born, who were living with the appellant-wife. It was further pleaded that from the very inception of the marriage, the behaviour of respondent-husband and his family members was rude and arrogant towards her as they were not satisfied with the dowry articles given by her parents. It was further pleaded that the appellant-wife was harassed and humiliated by the respondent-husband and his family members for bringing inadequate dowry. They used to demand more money from the appellant-wife and when she showed her inability to meet their demands, she was given beatings by them. It was further pleaded that the respondent-husband was a drug addict and he used to sell her jewellery to fund his addiction. It was further asserted that the respondent-husband used to visit tantriks. Instigated by his parents, the respondent-husband created an unbearable environment, forcing the appellant-wife to leave the matrimonial home and live in a rented accommodation along with her mother and children.

3. Upon notice, the respondent-husband entered appearance and filed his written statement, admitting the factum of marriage and the birth of two children. It was stated that the allegations levelled by the appellant-wife against him were false and frivolous. The allegations of demand of dowry etc., were denied. It was pleaded that the appellant-wife was given love and respect in the matrimonial home, but she chose to leave the respondent husband without any reasonable cause. It was further pleaded that the appellant-wife was under the influence of her parents and her mother used to interfere in their marital life. It was further pleaded that the respondent-husband had filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act, which showed that he was willing to reconcile with the appellant-wife. Accordingly, a prayer for dismissal of the petition was made.

4. From the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court, framed the following issues:-

1. Whether the respondent subjected the petitioner to cruelty after marriage? OPP

2. Whether the petition is not maintainable in the present form? OPR.

3. Whether the petitioner has not come to the court with clean hands? OPR

4. Relief.

5. In evidence, the appellant-wife herself appeared as PW-1 and had examined PW-2 Darshan Kaur and PW-3 Karnail Singh. On the other hand, the respondent examined himself as RW-1.

6. The learned trial Court, after taking into consideration rival contentions of the parties and evidence on record, dismissed the petition filed by the appellant-wife, as noticed above.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant-wife has vehemently contended that the appellant-wife had proved by way of evidence on record that the respondent-husband and his family members had committed cruelty against her. It is further submitted that the respondent-husband exhibited a controlling and distrustful attitude by frequently questioning the character of the appellant-wife and limiting her movement. Respondent-husband also threatened to take his own life and falsely implicate the appellant-wife and her mother in criminal cases. It is further argued that it was the pleaded case of the appellant-wife that the respondent-husband used to remain under addition and he had sold her entire jewellery to meet the expenses upon the intoxicants. It is further submitted that once the respondent-husband had withdrawn from all matrimonial obligations and responsibilities