IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 08.08.2025 Pronounced on: 28.08.2025 RAVI KUMAR SAINI ...Appellant VERSUS SUNITA SAINI ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present: Mr. Aman Arora, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Veer Imaan Singh Gill, Advocate for the respondent.

*****

DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA , J.

1. Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 15.01.2020 (HMA No. 1212 of 2016), passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Amritsar, 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-husband, inter alia, pleading therein that his marriage with the respondent-wife was solemnized on 30.11.1986, according to Sikh rites. After the marriage, the parties cohabited together as husband and wife, but no child was born from the lawful wedlock of parties.

3. It was pleaded that both the parties had lived together for a period of six months and during this period, their relationship was extremely strained on account of the wrongful acts and conduct so performed by the respondent- wife. Earlier, the appellant-husband filed a divorce petition on 23.01.1996 under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act (Petition No. 51 of 1996), which was declined by the learned District Judge, Amritsar, vide judgment dated 26.10.1999 and the first appeal (FAO No. 12-M of 2000) against the said judgment was also dismissed by this Court.

4. It was further pleaded by the appellant-husband that since the entrance of respondent-wife to her matrimonial house, her behavior and conduct towards him was quite strange and usually behaved in a very rude and arrogant manner with appellant-husband and his old aged parents.

5. It was further asserted that in May, 1987, after raising unnecessary quarrels, respondent-wife left the society of the appellant-husband and went to her parental house. At that time, she conceived a child from the loins of appellant-husband. The appellant-husband had been visiting parental house of the respondent-wife and asked her to accompany him but all went in vain. In November, 1987, appellant-husband received a message that respondent-wife was admitted in maternity ward of the hospital upon which appellant-husband alongwith Dr. Ashok Uppal and his wife had gone there and appellant-husband tried his level best to make her understand to come back to her matrimonial house but she refused to same. Unfortunately, pregnancy of the respondent-wife was terminated. In April, 1989, brother of the respondent-wife met with an accident and after getting the information, appellant-husband visited hospital and even donated blood to the respondent-wife's brother but he unfortunately died. In the month of July/August, 1989, the appellant-husband had 5/6 meetings with the respondent-wife and again requested her to resume cohabitation, but all went in vain. Ultimately, a petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the appellant-husband but after some time, on assurance given by the respondent-wife, the appellant-husband withdrew his petition in the year 1992 and in the month of September, 1993 respondent-wife returned back to her matrimonial house but she continued with similar unchanged behavior towards the appellant-husband and his parents. In addition to this, the respondent-wife refused to perform her marital obligations towards the appellant-husband and also refused to develop physical relations with the appellant-husband. Respondent-wife also maltreated old parents of the appellant-husband.

6. It was also the case of the appellant-husband that the respondent- wife told him that she wants to celebrate Lohri festival in her parental house and left her matrimonial house on 14.01.1994, thereafter respondent-wife came back to the house of the ap