2017 Supreme(UK) 335
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Rajiv Sharma, Sharad Kumar Sharma, JJ.
Usha Rana – Appellant
Versus
Virendra Singh Rana – Respondent
First Appeal No. 46 of 2016
Decided On : 25-10-2017
For the Appellant :Mr. Tanuj Semwal, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. M.S. Bisht, Advocate
Headnote:
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Sec. 13(1)(i-b) – Dissolution of Marriage – On grounds of cruelty and desertion – Statements as DW1 and DW2 – Consideration of – There was no hope for the parties to continue with the relationships of husband and wife – Held that according to the statement of wife, she does not want to live together with the husband and has stated that she wants Rs. 10 lacs to dissolve the marriage – Thus, there is a complete break down of marriage and there is no possibility of retrieving the same – Decree of divorce, not faulted with. (Paras 13 to 16, 18 to 20)
fgUnw fookg vf/kfu;e] 1955] /kkjk 13(1)(i-b) & Øwjrk o ifjR;kx ds vk/kkj ij fookg foPNsnu & iRuh ds rkSj ij DW1 o ek¡ ds rkSj ij DW2 }kjk vfHkfyf[kr dFku & fopkj & /kkfjr dksbZ vk'kk ugha fd nksuksa i{k ifr&iRuh ds laca/k esa lkFk jgus ds bPNqd Fks & iRuh ds dFkukuqlkj og vius ifr ds lkFk ugha jguk pkgrh Fkh vkSj og fookg foPNsnu ds fy, #- 10 yk[k dh ek¡x dj jgh Fkh & bl izdkj fookg dk lacaèk iw.kZr% VwV pqdk Fkk] ftls lkekU; djus dh dksbZ mEehn ugha Fkh & fookg foPNsnu dh fMØh esa] =qfV ughaA ¼izLrj 13 ls 16] 18 ls 20½
Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
1. It is a wife’s appeal filed belatedly challenging the judgment dated 15th January, 2016, passed by Additional Judge, Family Court Rishekesh, Dehradun, whereby, Suit No. 34 of 2015, Virendra Singh Rana Vs. Usha Rana, filed under Section 13 (1) (i-b), seeking dissolution of marriage solemnized on 19th March, 2014, has been decreed. In the relief, she has prayed for that the appeal may be allowed and the suit, as preferred by the husband for dissolution of marriage, may be dismissed.
2. The husband in his petition before the Family Court had submitted that though they had been married on 9th May, 2004, at Khedari, Kharakma, Tehsil Rishikesh, Dehradun, post marriage, the husband realized that the attitude of the wife towards the parents and other family members was not in accordance with the principles which normally a Hindu has to follow during her stay with her in-laws. The ground as agitated by the husband was that the respondent wife is a lady of very short temper and often gets irritated on every trifle issue which normally chances in each family, particularly, in any matrimonial relation and faced with the situation instead of exercising patience and accommodating, she gets aggravated and misbehaves and even to the extent of using abusive languages to the family members and husband.
3. The husband submitted that out of their cohabitation, a daughter Mahak was borne on 1st April, 2006 and 2nd child Master Lucky was borne on 2nd October, 2008. He submitted that both the children are being taken care of by the plaintiff himself because the defendant wife had never shown any concern, love and affection to them, because she had her own aptitude and mode towards her life of living freely. The husband submitted that when despite of all efforts to make her understand failed and gradually the environment in the family was deteriorated and it was practically becoming impossible to live together, the necessity arose to institute the proceedings on 21st August, 2015, because as a matter of fact the wife has gone so low that she has even lodged frivolous complaints against husband and family members and is not carrying any love and affection towards the children or the family members and has even lodged an F.I.R. before the Police Chauki Shyampur on 10th November, 2010.
4. The husband submitted that the wife on 30th October, 2015, came to the in-laws house and she misbehaved with his mother and after that she has taken all her valuables and left the matrimonial home alongwith her brother, thus, she has left the society of husband for no valid reasons.
5. In reply, wife filed her written statement and in the written statement she contended that the allegations in the plaint are partly admitted only to the extent of marriage having been solemnized between them on 19.03.2014 and the fact of birth of the children. Rest of the allegations which pertains to atrocities said to have been exercised by the wife was denied. She further submitted that there chanced an untoward incident on 14th August, 2012, when the plaintiff, after physically assaulting the defendant wife had thrown her out of the house and she had to take shelter in her parents’ home and is dependent upon them. She admitted the fact that on 21st February, 2015, she did lodge a complaint at Police Station, By-pass road and for the purposes of protection, she contends that she has taken the police personnel but still she submits that the incident of 21st February, 2015, has chanced when she was manhandled by the in-laws.
6. Another ground which she has pleaded in the written statement to support her contention that there was a cruelty being exercised by her in-laws, when she contended that despite of the fact that her family members had given sufficient amount of dowry, but still they continued to demand dowry. She submits that the parents of the husband are greedy persons and their lust for dowry never ends. She rather wanted to plead that she was dea