D. M. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

( 1 ) X This appeal is by the husband under S. 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the Act) against the judgment dt. 22-12-1989 of the Court of I Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Durg, whereby although on merits, the husband was held entitled to a decree of divorce on the ground of alleged cruelty on the part of the wife, but the relief has been refused on the ground that Court at Durg had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. The Court, on the above conclusion, returned the petition to the husband for presentation before the proper Court.

( 2 ) BOTH husband and wife are employed in Govt. service and at the time of marriage and also on the date of petition were posted at two different places. It is also admitted that the marriage between the parties took place at village Chandok in Sagar District. The husband's parental house is at village Buxwaha in Chhatarpur District. On the date of the petition filed in the trial Court seeking the decree of divorce, the wife was posted at Sagar and the husband was posted at Durg. The husband filed the petition for divorce in the court at Durg pleading that the parties last resided together at Balod, within the jurisdiction of the Court. The only pleading with regard to the place of jurisdiction of the Court is that the parties last resided together in Aug. , 1982 at Balod in District Durg. The husband claimed a decree of divorce on the ground that the wife was sexually important. The trial Court did not accept the ground urged by the husband of impotancy, because no medical evidence in support thereof was led and the other oral evidence led was not found sufficient in proof of the alleged ground. The trial Court, however, recorded a finding that the husband was entitled to a decree of divorce because the wife, in reply to the petition of divorce, took a reckless plea of the husband being leading an adulterous life, which she was unable to substantiate by cogent and reliable evidence. The trial Court placed reliance on decisions of several Courts contained in para 14 of its judgment to hold that such an irresponsible and false accusation by the wife against the husband is included within the matrimonial offence of "cruelty" within the meaning of S. 13 (1) (ia) of the Act, entitling the husband to a decree of divorce on that ground. As has been stated above, the trial Court returned the petition to the husband on the ground of lack of jurisdiction in it.

( 3 ) THE first question, therefore, needs to be decided is whether the Court at Durg had jurisdiction to entertain the petition? The wife in her written statement denied to have ever gone to stay with the husband at Balod in District Durg, where he was admittedly at the relevant time posted. Her case was that they last resided together in Nov. , 1985 in Buxwaha, District Chhatarpur, which is the parental house of the husband and where they used to meet as and when they had opportunities of meeting. The husband in his statement before the Court in para 17 gave a detailed version with regard to their stay at Balod. According to him, he was at Balod since July, 1981 and he wrote a letter to the brother of the wife to bring her to Balod. On the basis of the above letter, according to the husband, the wife came to Balod on 20/07/1982 and lived with him for a period of 20 days. She left Balod after quarrelling with him, because he was insisting that she should get herself transferred to Durg District. According to the husband, they thereafter never resided together.

( 4 ) THE wife in her deposition as NAW-2 in para 5 denied that she ever lived with her husband at Balod. According to her, they last met in Nov. , 1985 at the parental house of the husband at Buxwaha, District Chhatarpur. In the state of above evidence, the learned lower Court in para 8 of its judgment held that even if the case of the husband is accepted that they lived together in Aug. , 1982 at Balod, that cannot be said to be the place

Click Here to Read the rest of this document