CASE NO.

CASE NAME: INDU VS. RADHEY SHYAM

COURT NAME: COURT OF ADDL.DISTRICT JUDGE, HISAR

COURT ROOM: 05

PRESIDING OFFICER: JUDGE NISHA BHATIA

CASE NO.: 237-HMA, 2014/2016

PETITIONER: Indu, aged about 37 years, wife of Shri Radhey Shyam son of Shri Amar
Singh, and daughter of Shri Ram Partap, resident of Kanganpur Road, Sirsa, Tehsil and
District Hisar

RESPONDENT: Radhey Shyam, son of Shri Amar Singh, resident of Village Intel Kalan,
Tehsil and District Jind

MATTER: Petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955

DATE OF INSTT: 19.08.2014/03.11.2016.

DATE OF DECISION: 04.01.2017

FACTS OF THE CASE:

1. A petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been brought by
petitioner Indu for dissolution of her marriage with the respondent which was
solemnized on 04.12.2007 at Sirsa according to Hindu rites and ceremonies.
2. The parents of petitioner gave sufficient dowry to the respondent and his family
members and spent a huge amount in the marriage. After the marriage one daughter
Yashika took birth on 09.03.2010. That at the time of marriage the parents of
petitioner spent Rs.18, 00,000/- in this marriage and gave sufficient dowry articles
including cash and other gold and silver ornaments.
3. It was further submitted that the respondent and his family members hatched a
conspiracy and committed fraud with the petitioner and her family members as they
have told that respondent has passed PHD (Computer Science) and he is appointed as
Cargo Supervisor Officer in Cargo Air India and he is getting salary of Rs.30,000/-
per month. On the other hand, petitioner has passed M.Phil Computer Science and

1|Page
 parents of petitioner solemnized marriage of the petitioner with the respondent on
their false version.
4. After the marriage the behaviour of respondent and his parents towards petitioner was
not good. The respondent remained outside and used to come in the house for some
times. The petitioner was under this impression that the respondent used to visit his
office, whereas in fact he was not working in any office.
5. During the period the respondent never gave any salary but Rs.2, 00,000/- deposited
in the name of petitioner has also spent by the respondent. Thereafter the respondent
and his parents started taunting the petitioner for bringing inadequate dowry and
pressurized her to bring Rs. Two Lac for them otherwise they will turn her out from
matrimonial house.
6. They used to maltreat her badly and turn out from her matrimonial home time to time
and parents of petitioner convened Panchayat and paid Rs.50,000/- to the respondent
and requested them not to harass the petitioner. But again she was badly harassed. She
was turned out from her matrimonial home when she was pregnant. The petitioner
gave birth to child in her parental house, who has incurred the expenses of her
delivery.
7. Thereafter they convened panchayat and kept the petitioner with the respondent and
spent Rs.Two Lacs on the chhuchak of minor. Further it is submitted that one Krishan
Lal who told the petitioner that respondent is only qualified upto 10+2 and
unemployed. When after coming to know this fact petitioner tried to ask the said facts
from respondent then the respondent and his other family members in collusion with
each other have beaten the petitioner and threatened that she has no need to know
about status of respondent and in case she tried to enquire about it, they will kill the
petitioner.
8. The respondent and his family members have also threatened that they have not told
the real facts to the parents of the petitioner only with the oblique motive to grab
dowry and huge amount and also admitted of their fraud committed by them with the
petitioner and her other family members.
9. These facts came into knowledge on 20.09.2011 and thereafter she disclosed the same
to her parents. After that on 22.09.2011 the parents of petitioner alongwith other
respectable visited the house of respondent and before them the respondent and his
family members confessed their guilt and assured that they will never harass the
petitioner. But inspite of it, they have not changed their behaviour rather continued
2|Page
 their harassment and beating to the petitioner and started demanding cash amount
from the petitioner.
10. In the month of October, 2011 the petitioner was badly beaten by the respondent and
his other family members and they turned her out in three wearing clothes along with
minor child and they also threatened that in case the petitioner would not bring Rs.2,
00,000/- from her parents then they will not allow her to enter into her matrimonial
house.
11. After that parents and brother of the petitioner convened Panchayat consisting of
several respectable persons but before Panchayat also the respondent and his family
members adamant towards their demand of Rs.2,00,000/- and also refused to keep and
maintain the petitioner and minor child. Hence the petitioner filed the present petition.

REPLY BY RESPONDENT:

1. Petitioner is an ambitious lady having much desires even at the cost of respondent.
In the year 2011, when the petitioner went to her parental house and upon coming
her back to matrimonial home, she has totally changed her temperament and
spoiled the atmosphere resultantly a false and frivolous FIR No.638 dated
31.08.2012 was lodged against the respondent and his other family members with
the baseless and concocted grounds developed in her mind after a gap of five
years.
2. Thereafter the things were settled and the petitioner and respondent lived as
husband and wife. Then again she had preferred to file petition under the
Domestic Violence Act, wherein the Learned JMIC, allowed Rs.2500/- per month
for petitioner and minor child in shape of interim maintenance.
3. During the course of litigation again a panchayat was convened between the
parties and it was decided to withdraw all the pending litigations. But after few
days the petitioner went to her parental house and then she again prefer to file
another litigation in shape of present petition.
4. The respondent all the time fulfill the requirement of petitioner and their daughter
with utmost care and caution, even from the perusal of the petition there was no
reason or ground for filing the present petition. The respondent is still ready and
willing to reconcile the relationship with the petitioner and worried about the
future of their only daughter.

3|Page
 5. On merits the factum of solemnization of marriage and birth of child was
admitted. However, it was submitted that marriage was performed in a simple
manner. It was further submitted that parents of petitioner with due verification
happily married to their daughter with the respondent.
6. From the perusal of the allegations leveled in the petition it smell out that due to
gap of study between the parties, the petitioner is now creating/cooking grounds in
the petition, which has no legs and not tenable in the eyes of law. Further the
factum of writing dated 22.09.2011 has been admitted by the respondent but it
was further submitted that said writing was obtained on a blank paper with
consent of both the parties but now the father of petitioner cleverly brought the
same and misuse the same by giving shape as per his own wish and taste. While
denying the remaining contents, the dismissal of the petition was prayed for.

ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT:

(i) Whether the petitioner is entitled for decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty as
pleaded in the petition?
(ii) Whether the petition is not maintainable in the present form?
(iii) Whether the petitioner supressed the true and material facts?
(iv) Whether the petitioner has no cause of action and locus standi to file and the
petition?
(v) Whether the petitioner has not come to the Court with clean hands?

FINDINGS OF THE COURT AND DECISION:

It is pertinent to mention here that vide order dated 28.09.2016 the defense of respondent was
struck off as he has failed to make the payment of pending maintenance allowance to the
petitioner as per order dated 02.09.2016.

To prove her case the petitioner examined herself as PW1, her father Ram Partap as PW2 and
one Sant Lal as PW3 and also tendered documents. The court had heard the arguments
advanced by Shri Abhinav Sharma, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri
Ravinder Monga, Advocate learned counsel for the respondent and have also gone through
the case file carefully and thoroughly.

4|Page
ISSUE NO.1.

Onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioner. The petitioner has sought dissolution of
marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion, in order to prove the same she has examined
herself as PW1 and tendered her affidavit Ex.PW1/A in her evidence, in which she reiterated
the contents of the petition, which are not reproduced here for the sake of brevity. She has
further got examined her father as PW2 and her uncle Sant Lal as PW3, who both have
tendered their duly sworn affidavits Ex.PW2/A and Ex.PW3/A, respectively, and supported
the testimony of the PW1 on all counts. It is pertinent to mention here that the respondent
failed to pay the interim maintenance as awarded by the court vide order dated 02.09.2016,
hence the defence of the respondent was struck off vide order dated 28.09.2016. However, in
the reply to the petition also no sufficient ground was raised by the respondent which leads
this Court to dismissal of the present petition. Since the defence of the respondent was struck
off and even he has failed to rebut the evidence of the petitioner by leading cogent and
convincing evidence, therefore, in this way the evidence produced by the petitioner stands
unchallenged and unrebutted on record. The testimony of the witnesses examined by the
petitioner is held sufficient to prove that she was treated with such cruelty by the respondent
which made her entitled for dissolution of her marriage by a decree of divorce. In view of the
above submissions this issue is decided in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent.

ISSUES NO. 2 to 5:

Onus to prove these issues was upon the respondent but the respondent has not led any
evidence to prove these issues. In view of the submissions made in issue No.1 the issues No.2
to 5 are decided against the respondent.

RELIEF

Keeping in view of the above findings on issue No.1, the present petition is, hereby, allowed
with costs and the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent is, hereby, dissolved by
decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty under Sections 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage
Act,1955. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly. File be consigned to records after due
compliance.

5|Page