IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on 10.02.2025 Pronounced on: 24.02.2025 SHIV KUMAR ...Appellant Versus KAVITA SHARMA ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR Present:- Mr. G.S. Ghumman, Advocate for appellant.

Mr. Shobit Phutela, Advocate for respondent.

SUDHIR SINGH, J.

Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 18.08.2018 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kaithal (for short‘the trial Court’), whereby the petition under Section 13 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- wife, inter-alia, pleading therein that his marriage with the respondent-wife was solemnized on 17.04.1998 as per Hindu rites and out of the said wedlock, two daughters and one son were born. It was further alleged that in 2001, the respondent-wife deserted the appellant-husband without any reason and started living with her parents. She joined his company in 2005, but again deserted him and she along with the two daughters, started living at Kurukshetra with her parents. In 2006, when the appellant-husband got the job of a Guest Teacher at Government Girls Middle School, Bandrana, he requested the respondent-wife to live with him at Village Chandlana, but she refused to do so. In 2008, with the intervention of the relatives, the respondent-wife again joined the company of the appellant-husband and started living with him. On 04.02.2011, when the appellant-husband was at school, the respondent-wife with two unknown persons entered his house at Village Chandlana and took away the valuable documents and other articles. On 22.03.2011, the respondent-wife got the school leaving certificate of both the daughters without giving any information to the appellant-husband. When on 01.06.2011, the appellant-husband visited the parental house of the respondent-wife to bring her back, her father had misbehaved with him in her presence. On 22.07.2011, the appellant-husband filed a petition for the custody of the minor daughter in the Court at Kaithal and as a counterblast to it, the respondent-wife had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., besides filing a suit for declaration with possession and permanent injunction in respect of personal property of the appellant-husband. The respondent-wife was not allowed to meet his daughter Vidhi in her School at Kurukshetra. Terming the aforesaid acts and conduct of the respondent-wife as cruelty, a decree of divorce had been sought for.

3. Upon notice, the respondent-wife entered appearance and filed her written statement admitting the factum of marriage and birth of the children. However, it was alleged that the behaviour of the appellant-husband and his family members towards the respondent- wife was cruel and they used to raise illegal demands of dowry. The appellant-husband had levelled false allegations against her character and had also threatened of getting the DNA test of all the children done. The appellant-husband had also caused cruelty to the respondent-wife by not allowing her to continue her study. Many Panchayats had been convened, but to no avail. It was further alleged that she had never deserted the appellant-husband. Rest of the allegations regarding cruelty to the appellant-husband were denied.

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

i) Whether the petitioner is entitled for a decree of divorce on the grounds taken in the petition? OPP ii) Whether the petitioner has suppressed the true and material facts from the Court? OPR iii) Relief.

5. In evidence, the appellant-husband examined himself as PW-1; PW2-Ishwar Ghavri, Criminal Ahlmad and PW3-Gulshan Tanawar Clerk, Maharana Partap Public School (Junior Wing), Kurukshetra besides tendering evidence Ex.P1 to Ex.P8. On the other hand, the respondent-wife examined her