SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(P&H) 1352

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Sudhir Singh and Sukhvinder Kaur, JJ.
Sonia – Appellant
Versus
Divesh Khullar – Respondent
FAO-1185-2025 (O&M)
Decided on : 26-03-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Rajesh Bhatheja, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Sudhir Singh, J.

Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 16.11.2024 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Ludhiana (for short 'the Family Court'), whereby the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') filed by the respondent-husband was allowed, and the marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty.

2. The aforesaid petition had been filed by the respondent-husband, inter-alia, pleading therein that his marriage with the appellant-wife was solemnized on 22.10.2017 as per Hindu rites. No child was born out of the said wedlock. It was further alleged that after the marriage, the appellant-wife refused to cohabit with the respondent-husband and told that her marriage with him was performed against her wishes. Her behaviour was also not good with the family of the respondent-husband and she used to quarrel with them on petty issues. She would remain busy in chatting and talking on mobile phone with her family members, who used to instigate her against the respondent-husband and his family members. It was further alleged that she had also started raising the demand of living separately and to get the ownership of the property transferred in her name. It was further alleged that on 04.11.2017, the appellant-wife quarreled with the respondent-husband and his family members and called her brother, who took her with him on 05.11.2017. The brother of the appellant-wife misbehaved with the family members of the respondent-husband and threatened to implicate them in false cases. She left with her brother without bothering about the medical condition of the respondent-husband, who had suffered multiple injuries due to an accidental fall. She was brought back on 19.11.2017, but she used to remain in her bedroom on the first floor. She was requested to mend her ways, but to no avail. On 24.03.2018, she quarreled with the respondent-husband and his family members. She had pressurized the respondent-husband for giving her divorce and told him that in case, he did not do so, she would commit suicide and involve them in a false case. On 07.05.2018, she again picked-up a quarrel and broke the mobile phone of the respondent-husband and also called her parents. On 08.05.2018, her parents took her along with them saying that they would teach the respondent-husband a lesson. Efforts were made to bring her back, but the same did not yield any result. On 23.10.2018, 15-20 persons came to the office of the respondent-husband and had misbehaved with them. The respondent-husband had submitted an application dated 23.10.2028 to the Police Station, City-II, Khanna, but the police did not take any action thereon. The appellant-wife, in connivance with her family members, moved a false application at Dharamkot, where the respondent-husband and his family members were called and they were assured that the matter would be pacified, but after some days, the authorities of the Women Cell, Moga, called them and told that the appellant-wife had moved an application against him and his family members. Terming the aforesaid acts as cruelty on the part of the appellant-wife, a decree of divorce has been sought for.

3. Upon notice, the appellant-wife entered appearance and filed her written statement admitting the factum of marriage. However, it was alleged that the allegations contained in the divorce petition were false and frivolous. It was further pleaded that the sister of the respondent-husband was a divorcee and she was living in her parental house. They all taunted, harassed and humiliated the appellant-wife for bringing insufficient dowry. She was not allowed to go outside the house. A demand of Rs.5 Lakhs along with a car was also raised and when she expressed her inability to meet the said illegal demand, she had been given beatings. The respondent-husband used to consume liquor daily and under the influence thereof, he used

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top