Reeta Devi vs Balwinder Sharma

Sureshwar Thakur, J

The instant appeal is directed by the aggrieved therefrom, against, an affirmative verdict, pronounced upon Hindu Marriage Petition No. 244 of 2015, by, the learned District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala, wherethrough, the, marriage interse the contesting litigants, was annulled.

Before proceeding to make, an, adjudication, vis-à-vis, the respective contentions, addressed before this Court, by the counsel appearing, for, the contesting litigants, it is imperative to bear, in, mind, that, though this Court had, on 3.5.2018, made an order, upon CMP No. 10415 of 2017, hence staying the operation, of, the appealed against apposite judgment, and, decree, (i) yet, through CMP bearing No. 9271 of 2018, the appellant, espouses qua, the afore orders becoming breached, (ii) given his, in, the interregnum, since the impugned pronouncement, being recorded, by the learned District Judge, and, the institution of an appeal, there-against, before this Court, rather, the respondent herein contracting a marriage, with, one Anita. The afore made argument, before this Court, warrants its being discountenanced, (iii) as apparently, the solemnization, of, the second marriage, by the respondent herein, occurred prior, to, this Court, staying, the, operation, of, the impugned judgment, and, decree. (iv) Also, hence this Court, may not be coaxed, to, make any conclusion, vis-à-vis, the respondent herein, committing bigamy, and, nor any conclusion is warranted, vis-à-vis, the appellant, becoming leveraged to either seek impleadment, of, the afore Anita, or to seek, annulment, of the marriage contracted interse the respondent herein, with, the afore Anita.

Be that as it may, for the reasons, to be assigned hereinafter, the affirmative verdict recorded, upon, the apposite Hindu Marriage Petition, also does not suffer, from, any infirmity, (i) inasmuch, as, the learned District Judge concerned, committing any error, of, mis-apprising the germane evidence, or his omitting to appraise, any, evidence germane, to, the relevant formulated issues, (ii) given, a closest perusal, of, the evidence adduced, by, the petitioner herein, underscoring the factum, vis-à-vis, there occurring a prolonged acrimony, and, bitterness, in, their matrimonial relations, iii) the appellant/applicant after solemnizing marriage with the respondent herein, on 30.4.2006, hers continuously thereafter, holding wrangles with her husband, and also hers, without any reasonable cause, and, even without the consent, of, her husband, the, respondent herein, rather repeatedly proceeding, to, her matrimonial home, iv) and yet hers lodging, a, complaint with the police in the year 2009, and, the afore complaint becoming compromised, on 3.10.2009. Even thereafter, as evident, on, a reading of, the, plaintiffs' evidence, the appellant herein yet, remaining incorrigible, (v) furthermore, the, adduced interse corroborative evidence also underscores the factum, vis-à-vis, the appellant herein, through making unproven allegations, vis-à-vis, the, impotence, of, her husband, and, also hers meteing threatening(s) to, commit suicide, upon hers, being compelled, to, live with the petitioner, (vi) whereupon, hence all afores rather beget inference(s), vis-à-vis, the respondent, besides, perpetrating mental trauma, and, cruelty, upon her husband, (vii) also, as surges forth from credible, cogent, and, interse corroborative evidence, hence hers' carrying, the, requisite animus-deserendi, and, thereupon the annulment, of, marital ties interse, them, being apt and befitting.

Even though, the respondent, has imputed, allegations against her husband, vis-à-vis, his subjecting her, to physical cruelty, and also, his making demands of dowry, upon her, and she has also testified, that, the purported demands of dowry, made, by the respondent, and, his mother, standing comprised, in, a demand, for, a sum of Rs. 50,000/,-and, vis- à-vis, installation, of, LPG connection, (i) however, the afore allegations appear to be perse contrived, as, a perusal of Ext. PW1/A, demonstrates vis-à-vis, a, LPG connection occurring in the house of the petitioner, on, 31.3.2004, and, hence prior, to, the rearings, of, the afore allegations, vis-à-vis, the afore factum, (ii) hers making no disclosers, to, the Pradhan, of, the Panchayat concerned, vis-à-vis, the respondent herein or his mother, rather both demanding dowry, (iii) thereupon also the afore allegations appear, to be, ingeneously contrived allegations. Furthermore, with the respondent though alleging, vis-à-vis, her husband , under, the influence of liquor, delivering physical beatings, upon her, (iv) yet even the afore allegations appear to be ingrained, with, a, deep vice, of, falsity, as vis-à-vis, the afore allegations, also no disclosure(s), are reported, to, the Pradhan, or, to the Up-Pradhan, of, the Panchayat concerned, besides given both, the, aforesaid, upon stepping into the witness box, rather denying, the, afore factum.

Pre-eminently, with the appellant, during her cross-examination, admitting the factum, of, hers' recording, a, compromise, with her husband, and, as embodied in Ext. PX, and, also when she acquiesced vis-à-vis, hers appending her signatures thereon, does, obviously underline the factum, vis-à-vis, prior thereto, hence, since 2006, and, upto 3.10.2009, whereat Ext. PX, stood drawn interse them, hence thereupto there occurring acrimony, and, bitterness, in, their matrimonial relations, (i) and also when thereafter, the, appellant herein remained incorrigible, vis-à-vis, her errant, and, deviant conduct, (ii) thereupon it appears that the petitioner, proving, the, factum qua his spouse, one Reeta Devi, without his consent, and also without any reasonable cause, rather, leaving repeatedly, for her matrimonial home, (iii) besides, hers concomitantly, perpetrating mental cruelty, and, also hers, carrying, the, apt animus deserendi. Moroever, with also hers lodging false complaints, against, the husband, and, also moving against him, cases under the Domestic Violence Act, and, despite hers', being incorrigibly deviant and errant, in performing her matrimonial obligations, thereupon, an, inference, is, sparked qua hers encumbering cruelty, upon her husband, the, respondent herein.

Consequently, there is no merit, in, the appeal, and, the same is dismissed. The impugned verdict, rendered by the learned District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala, is, maintained, and, affirmed. However, in the larger interest(s) of justice, it is deemed fit, and, appropriate, that, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- be paid, within three months, as compensation, vis-à-vis, the appellant herein, by, the respondent. All pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of.