Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(vi) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get other equitable relief or reliefs under the provision of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?

9. The evidences have been led on behalf of both the parties. Thereafter, the judgment has been passed allowing the suit which is the subject matter of the present appeal.

Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant-wife:

10. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that concealment of the fact that the appellant was a divorcee at the time of marriage is not true, as the bio-data was given to the father of the respondent/husband mentioning therein that the appellant/wife was a divorcee.

24. The evidence has been led on behalf of both the parties before the Family Court. For better appreciation, the evidences led on behalf of the parties is being referred as under:

2025:JHHC:23881-DB

25. The husband (P.W.1) has stated that after death of mother, his father got his second marriage and never took care of him who lived at her maternal grand father's house. The husband (P.W.-1) has admitted his marriage on 17.06.2010 with the respondent and has deposed that by way of concealing the fact that the wife (appellant herein) was a divorcee, her family members got them married. After marriage, the wife never allowed the husband any physical relation with her on the pretext that she has some physical infirmity. The wife started saying that she is not willing to live at Ranchi thus her brother took her to Patna and on repeated visits of the husband to her place at Patna, she was not ready to come back to Ranchi, however, she returned back lastly but after return to Ranchi she never did her domestic work and never allowed him to cohabit. He has also deposed that he himself cooked food and did any domestic works of the house which caused a pathetic life to him. She also used to run away from the house without informing him. It has been also deposed by him that when he became fed up by abusive language and threatening of implicating him in dowry cases and that the wife used to conceal his bike keys, ATM Card and medicines deliberately, he informed the matter to the State Mahila Ayog on 16.08.2016 and 03.10.2016 for cruel behaviour of the wife. Even thereafter, the behaviour of the wife became more cruel, thus, he was compelled to leave his Govt. accommodation in the year 2016. This matter was also informed to the State Mahila Ayog on 06.04.2017 and started functioning in his office from his village. The matter was pacified by intervention of the 2025:JHHC:23881-DB State Mahila Ayog then he opened an Account in the name of the wife in Union Bank of India, Doranda, Ranchi and deposited a sum of Rs.31,000/- even then, the matter was not settled. The wife never discharged her obligation as wife so he filed a case of restitution of conjugal right in the Family Court, Ranchi bearing MTS Case No. 222/2017 on 12.04.2017, but the wife did not appear in that case even after receiving the notice.

Due to no change in the cruel behaviour of the wife, the husband again moved to the State Mahila Commission, from there both the parties were directed to be appear before the Commission on 04.05.2017 by issuing notice to the respective parties. The wife admitted before the State Mahila Commission that she is divorcee and vide MTS Case No.304/2003 at Patna, her marriage was dissolved. After knowing this the husband became shocked and saddened, because the appellant-wife and her family members concealed the facts and fraudulently got her married with him. The husband obtained a copy of prescription for treatment of the wife from IGIMS Patna showing sexual infirmity which is cruelty against him. The wife never took part in family function of the husband and she never allowed him for physical contact. The wife is forcibly living in the quarter allotted to the husband and he was never allowed to enter therein by committing domestic violence and for that, he sent letter to Dy.SP, S.P., SSP and the State Mahila Commission. Motorcycle of the petitioner has also been damaged by the wife which was parked in his 2025:JHHC:23881-DB office garage Survey Department of India Ranchi, and for that he sent written information to the Director of the department.

27. P.W. 2-Mukhlal Saw has stated that he was working in Indian Survey Department at Patna. He knows Dileep Prasad, cousin brother of the wife, whom he suggested for marriage of the respondent husband with his cousin (wife) and took part in negotiation of marriage once or twice but the family member of the wife never disclosed that the wife was already a divorcee. P.W.- 2 has admitted that the husband (respondent herein) himself was cooking food and doing domestic works. He has also deposed that he was present in negotiation of marriage twice but never participated in the marriage from any side. He has denied to know that how many litigations are going on between the parties.