IMPORTANT POINT
Cruelty is a sufficient ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, and a finding of cruelty necessitates the granting of a divorce, independent of other grounds such as desertion.

JUDGMENT :

Om Prakash Shukla, J.

1. Heard Mr. Rohit Tripathi, learned counsel for appellant and Mr. D.P. Singh Somvanshi, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. These appeals under Section 19 (1) of the Family Court Act, 1984 read with Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 have been filed by the appellant/husband, assailing the judgment and decree dated 15.02.2021 passed by the Principal Judge/District Judge, Family Court, Lucknow, whereby Regular Suit No. 886 of 2012 filed by the appellant/husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage was dismissed and Regular Suit No. 29 of 2013 filed by the respondent/wife under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal right was decreed in favour of the respondent/wife.

3. Since the above-captioned appeals arise out of a common factual matrix and judgment, hence they are being decided by a common order.

FACTS

4. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts, in brief, which give rise to the appeals herein are as follows :

In both these appeals, the appellant is the husband and the respondent is the wife. Appellant got married with respondent on 27th November, 1986. Two sons were born out of the wedlock of the parties. According to the appellant, after conceiving both sons, his wife (respondent herein) was not interested in him at all and started misbehaving with him in front of servants and other members of the family. It has been alleged by the appellant that on one day, his wife (respondent herein) locked him in toilet; his wife used to connect/co-relate him with a lady residing next door; she abused his parents in front of his children; after 2003, she stopped even giving food to him; though he took her to U.S.A. for 18 months/Europe for 4 months; in the year 2008, he arranged for a visit to Kerala with his entire family but the respondent strictly refused for it; since 2003, only course of communication between them was either through sons or SMS or handwritten notes, which even spilled over at the time of offering tea/lunch etc.; and since 2003, respondent is living separately with the appellant under the same roof. According to the version of the appellant, in compelling circumstances, he instituted a suit, bearing Regular Suit No. 886 of 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘First Suit’), under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for declaring his marriage with the respondent as null and void.

5. After filing the aforesaid suit on 28.04.2012, the respondent-wife had lodged four cases against the appellant/husband, namely, (a) case under provisions of the Domestic Violence Act; (b) case for Maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.; (c) Criminal Case under Sections 498A/323/504/506/406 I.P.C.; and (d) under provisions of Dowry Prohibition Act, for which Police Complaint was lodged in November, 2012. Subsequently, the defendant/respondent/wife had also instituted a suit, bearing Regular Suit No. 29 of 213 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Second Suit’), under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights. Both suits were clubbed together and heard analogously by the Family Court.

6. The respondent/defendant/wife had filed his written statement in the aforesaid suits and denied the allegations made by the appellant/plaintiff/husband. She set up her own version of the case in as much as she has stated that she conceived two male children, namely, Vishwendu Kundu and Diyendu Kundu and after their birth, she had to take care of her children as well as had to fulfill her own duties and responsibilities; she never ignored her own duties and responsibilities towards her husband/appellant; she never locked the plaintiff/appellant; all the decisions with respect to the children were taken by the plaintiff/appellant; appellant himself wanted the children to study in convent school, therefore, he got them admitted at St. Francis College, Lucknow; he also wanted the children to become Engineers and she only use