Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. (Oral)

This appeal, preferred under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.09.2007, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, whereby petitioner/appellant’s Divorce Petition No. 56 of 2003, under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is dismissed by said court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.

3. Brief fact of the case are that both the parties are Hindus. Petitioner-Harish Chandra Singh Chilwal, got married to respondent Smt. Pushpa, on 23.02.1993, at Ramnagar, according to Hindu rites. After the marriage, for sometime the couple lived peacefully but thereafter they started quarrelling. Out of the wedlock, two daughters were born, who were now grown up. The petitioner/appellant’s case is that respondent used to insult him by saying that his practice as an Advocate is poor and he is living as a dependant on his family. She used to taunt him by saying that she earns more than her husband. It is further alleged that she used to insist her husband (present petitioner/appellant) to get separated from his joint family. Agreeing to demand, the petitioner started living with his wife in a rented accommodation. It is further alleged in the divorce petition that respondent used to go to her parents house too frequently. It is further alleged that respondent insulted the petitioner’s mother and committed cruelty against the petitioner and his family. Finally, in the year 2002, she left the house of the petitioner. The petitioner has further alleged that petitioner is regularly sending amount of maintenance for children, who are living with his wife. It is further stated that petitioner herself is earning member and is teaching in a school.

4. The respondent contested the petition of divorce but admitted having got married to the petitioner on 23.02.1993, as stated in the divorce petition. She denied that she insulted her husband or committed any cruelty against him. She further pleaded that it is her husband (present petitioner/appellant), who treated the respondent with cruelty and negligence.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed following three issues :-

1. Whether the respondent treated the petitioner with cruelty, after their marriage?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to decree of divorce under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on the ground of cruelty?

3. To what relief, if any, the petitioner is entitled?

6. Both the parties adduced their oral and documentary evidence before the trial court. The trial court after hearing the parties and discussing the evidence, dismissed the petition with the finding that respondent has not treated the petitioner with cruelty. Hence this appeal before this Court.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the trial court has not appreciated the evidence on record properly and finding recorded by it is erroneous in law. We have re-appreciated the evidence on record, adduced by the parties.

8. Admittedly, the respondent was married to the petitioner on 23.02.1993, at Ramnagar, according to Hindu rites. The dispute between the parties is as to the fact whether the respondent treated the petitioner (present appellant) with cruelty or not. The most important statement on the record is that of petitioner himself, who was got examined as P.W.1 Harish Chandra Chilwal. On going through his statement, we found that he has stated on oath that respondent treated him with cruelty. It is further stated by P.W.1 Harish Chandra Chilwal that his wife used to insult him by saying that his practice is poor and he is living as dependant on his family. It is further stated by him that she used to say that she earns more than her husband. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that this kind of utterances from wife caused mental cruelty against him, as he used to feel insulted time and again. Not only this, our attention is also draw