Smt. Renuka @ Renu vs ) Sh. Devender on 16 May, 2020
3. In response to the summons of the petition, respondents filed a
detailed joint reply wherein they have vehemently controverted all the allegations
levelled against them in the petition. They have taken a series of preliminary
objections to the maintainability of the present petition. They have denied
committing any act of domestic violence against the petitioner and averred that the
petitioner had unlawfully married the respondent no.1 without taking a formal
divorce from her first husband. They have also averred that Mohan was not the son
of the respondent no.1 and that he was the son of the petitioner from her first
marriage. The respondents have averred that the marriage between the petitioner and
the respondent no.1 was performed in a simple manner at Shiv Mandir, Arya Puri,
Muzaffarnagar, without much fanfare. The respondents have denied that the
respondent no.1 was earning Rs. 20, 000/- by working as a clerk of a lawyer. It is
averred that the respondent no.1 was only earning Rs. 3, 000/- per month. The
respondents have alleged that from this meager income of Rs. 3000/-, the respondent
New Case No.6797/16
Renuka @ Renu Vs. Devender and Others Page number 3 of 10
no.1 was running the entire family. It is also alleged that the petitioner was also
earning Rs. 3, 000/- per month doing the job of cleaning utensils in a few houses
nearby. It is also alleged that the respondent nos. 2 to 8 were living separately and
hence, they had no opportunity to harass or torture the petitioner as alleged. The
respondents pressed for dismissal of the petition.