IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) General allegations of cruelty do not constitute cruelty in eyes of law so as to grant decree of dissolution of marriage on that premise – There is no allegation of violence against each other.
(2) Expressing desire by wife who is well qualified that she wants to do job does not amount to cruelty.

JUDGMENT

Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Alleging cruelty and desertion against the wife, the appellant/husband approached to this Court by filing an appeal against the judgment and decree of restitution of conjugal rights in A-Petition No.15/2018 (Old Hindu Marriage Petition No.81/2013) and dismissal of A-Petition. No.4/2018 (Old Hindu Marriage Petition No.52/2013) filed for dissolution of marriage.

3. The facts of the case giving rise to the dispute are as follows:—

[A] The marriage of the appellant/husband and the respondent/wife was solemnized on 08/08/2001 as per Hindu rites and religion at mouje Anjangaon-Surji, Taluka Anjan-gaon-Surji, District Amravati. After marriage, the respondent/wife resumed cohabitation at the house of the appellant/husband at Buldana. The appellant/husband was serving as an Assistant Teacher at M.E.S. High School, Mehkar at the relevant time and was shuttling between Mehkar and Buldana. The respondent/wife is also qualified and completed her post-graduation and was desiring to do a teacher’s job.

[B] After marriage, for a period of four months they resided together at Buldana. As per the contention of the appellant/husband that as per desire of the respondent/wife he was searching a suitable job of Teacher for her. However, she was harassing him for searching Teacher’s job and was also threatening that she would not beget a child, till she secures a job. In the meantime, the respondent/wife delivered a male child on 14/06/2002 at her maternal place. After spending of three months at maternal house after delivery she resumed cohabitation at the house of the appellant/husband. As per the contention of the appellant/husband, after birth of the child again she started harassing him on the count that she wants to start her tuition classes at Mehkar. Therefore, on 01/10/2002 he shifted to Mehkar along with the respondent/wife and son Tejas. Though he shifted to Mehkar, the respondent/wife had not started tuition classes by assigning reason that her son is infant and she has to look after him. The appellant/husband and the respondent/wife due to summer vacation shifted to Buldana and stayed there for two months. In the month of July, 2003 as the father of the respondent/wife was not well, she went at her parents’ house and returned back on 16/07/2003. They again shifted to Mehkar on 20/07/2003 and stayed there till May, 2004. Due to summer vacation in May, 2004 the appellant/husband and the respondent/wife came at Buldana. At the relevant time, the respondent/wife was four weeks pregnant, but she was not ready to carry her pregnancy and insisted for terminating the pregnancy. The appellant/husband was not ready for the same and tried to convince her but the respondent/wife was not in a position to listen anything. Therefore, the appellant/husband had informed her mother on 01/05/2004. As per the communication with the mother of the respondent/wife, she told him to send the respondent/wife at her parental house and assured him that they will take care of everything and he should not worry. It is alleged by the appellant/husband that before proceeding towards parental house the respondent/wife quarreled with him, collected all her belongings and went at her maternal house along with son. After reaching at her maternal house, the respondent/wife had not contacted him and whenever the appellant/husband had tried to contact, she had not responded. The appellant/husband called her on 07/06/2004 and requested to come at Buldana by or before 14/06/2004 as there was birthday of son Tejas but the respondent/wife did not turned up nor communicated with the appellant/husband. The respondent/wife on 10/07/2004 by telephonic communication called him at her maternal place to fetch her back. Accordingly, he visited her maternal house but the respondent/wife asked him to obtain the permission of her father. On communication with the father, the father of the respondent/wife refused