IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 10.02.2025 GURPREET SINGH ...Appellant Versus SANDEEP KAUR ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR Present:- Mr. Birinder Singh Kehar, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. A.S. Manaise, Advocate for respondent.

SUDHIR SINGH, J.

Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 03.05.2016 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fazilka (for short `the Family Court’), whereby the petition under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act’) filed by the appellant-husband, was dismissed.

2. The aforesaid petition had been filed by the appellant- husband, inter-alia, pleading therein that his marriage with the respondent-wife was solemnized on 02.02.2009 as per Hindu rites and out of the said wedlock, a male child was born. It was further asserted that the respondent-wife wanted to continue her studies and she had initially agreed to stay with the appellant-husband’s parents, but had left after giving birth to a male child in the year 2011, citing the illness of her mother. It was further pleaded that a settlement for mutual divorce was reached in 2014, but the respondent-wife failed to appear in the Court in 2015, leading the dismissal of the petition under Section 13-B of the Act.

3. Upon notice, the respondent-wife appeared and filed her written statement admitting the factum of marriage and the birth of the child. However, it was asserted that the appellant-husband and his family members maltreated and harassed her for more dowry. Furthermore, in respect of the beatings given to her, the respondent- wife referred to the MLR from Civil Hospital, Abohar dated 19.09.2014 wherein she had sustained injuries on her person. It was further alleged that when the respondent-wife was not able to meet the illegal demands of dowry raised by the appellant-husband and his family members, she had been turned out of the matrimonial home.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the Family Court:-

i) Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner without any reason or sufficient cause? OPP ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty? OPP iii) Whether the petition is not maintainable?

OPR iv) Whether the petitioner has no cause of action to file the present petition? OPR v) Relief.

5. In evidence, the appellant-husband examined himself as PW-1; Harbhagwan Singh as PW2 and Janak Raj as PW3. On the other hand, the respondent examined herself as RW1; Jagmandeep Singh as RW-2 and Amninder Singh as RW3.

6. The learned Family Court, after taking into consideration rival contentions of the parties and evidence on record, dismissed the petition filed by the appellant-husband, as noticed above.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant-husband has vehemently contended that the appellant-husband had never demanded any dowry from the respondent-wife and had always treated her with utmost respect and care in the matrimonial home. Further, the respondent-wife’s callous attitude towards the appellant- husband created hurdles in the married life. It is further argued that the appellant-husband had led sufficient evidence on record to prove the acts of cruelty on the part of the respondent-wife, but the same has been ignored by the learned Family Court. It is further argued that the parties have been livings separately since 2012 and there is nothing left in their marriage and it has become a dead wood.

8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent- wife, while defending the findings recorded by the learned Family Court, submits that the allegations levelled by the appellant-husband in the divorce petition, were general and vague in nature and the same could not be proved by way of any cogent and convincing evidence. While referring to the MLR (Ex. R1), it is argued by the learned counsel for the respondent-wife th