IMPORTANT POINT
The intentional alienation of a child from a parent can amount to extreme mental cruelty, justifying the grant of divorce.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. An Appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been filed on behalf of the appellant/wife against the judgment and decree dated 04.09.2018 granting divorce under Section 13 (1)(ia) and (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1955") on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

2. The parties got married according to Hindu customs and rites on 06.05.1996 at Arya Samaj Mandir, Sheikh Sarai, New Delhi and a daughter Sejal was born from the said wedlock on 21.12.1998. The respondent-husband (petitioner in the divorce petition) was in Indian Army and got posted at different locations. Therefore, the appellant-wife (respondent in the divorce petition) along with the minor, stayed at the parental home of the respondent i.e. the matrimonial home in Noida. She took up a job when the child, was one year old. Later, towards the end of 2000, she along with the child joined the respondent/husband at Manipur, but she came back within six months. In 2002, respondent/husband was posted in U.P, where again the appellant along with the minor joined him. He then got posted in Delhi in 2003. The appellant again took up a job in Delhi. In the year 2006, the respondent was posted in J & K and in March, 2007 he went on a UN Mission to Congo. During this period appellant and the minor stayed in the matrimonial home at Noida. Since the appellant was working, the minor child was taken care of by the respondent's parents to the best of their capacity. However, the appellant for the reasons best known to her was not happy with the parents and was disrespectful and rude towards them.

3. The respondent/husband on return from Congo Mission in March, 2008 took up a house on rent in Saket, close to the parental home of the appellant/wife. He also provided the facilities of Sahayaks from the Army to take care of the household chores, but the respondent's attitude was nagging and fault finding which created adverse impact on the mind of the respondent.

4. In June, 2008 the respondent got posted at Kasauli and requested the appellant to join him at his place of posting. However, she expressed her inability to spare time even for the daughter. The respondent claimed that the appellant abandoned his company and never cohabited with him. On the insistence of the appellant, the daughter Sejal was admitted to a Boarding School in Kasauli, while the appellant as per her own wishes concentrated on her professional life. The daughter Sejal studied in Pinegrove School, Kasauli, for two years, since April, 2009. Thereafter, on the insistence of the appellant, she was shifted to Chinmaya Vidyalya, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi.

5. The respondent had claimed that since he returned from Congo Mission in March, 2008, the relations between him and his wife were estranged on account of indifferent attitude of the appellant. She hardly talked to the respondent which caused deep frustration and depression in his mind. In order to shift the blame on the respondent, the appellant wrote various complaints to the Commanding Officer, Family Welfare Organization and the Army Head Quarters making baseless, frivolous and false allegations, blaming the respondent for deserting her and the daughter. She claimed the maintenance for the child, even though the respondent was already paying for her education and taking care of her interest. In response to the queries by Army Authorities, he volunteered to pay the maintenance for the minor. The appellant during proceedings for maintenance before the Army Authorities, filed affidavits levelling false allegations against him.

6. The respondent had further asserted that in order to avoid any amicable resolution of the disputes, the appellant shifted to Pune and withdrew the child from the school in Delhi and got her admitted in a school at Pune so as to snap any contact between the respondent and his daughter. The respondent thus, asserted that he had been deserted by the appellant.

7. On the aspect o