Smt.Sonali Maheshwari vs Kamlesh Maheshwari
2022 Latest Caselaw 455 MP

                                   1                                FA-14-2015
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                  FA No. 14 of 2015
                 (SMT.SONALI MAHESHWARI Vs KAMLESH MAHESHWARI)

Gwalior, Dated : 10-01-2022
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Shri Manas Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant/wife.
      Shri H.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent/husband.

Wife and husband are also present in person through video conferencing.

This appeal by wife is directed against the judgment 12.11.2014 of the Family Court, Vidisha whereby court has dismissed the application for divorce filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed on the ground of cruelty and desertion.

During the course of hearing, it has transpired that marriage between the two was solemnized on 22.11.2008. However, the marriage could only prolong for two years. Thereafter, since 2010, they are living separately.

Learned counsel for the parties submit that love is lost and

emotions are dried up between the two. It is irretrievable marriage and there is no possibility of reconciliation after having lived life separately for last ten years. It is also surfaced that they are issue less.

Shri Manas Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been subjected to hostile attitude and bad behaviour during the period she stayed in the family of respondent/husband and during her pregnancy, family members of husband not only hurled abuses and ill- treated her but also subjected her to black magic by which she has undergone mental agony. When she was pregnant for first time, respondent aborted the pregnancy and second time, the child born lived only for two months and thereafter died. That apart, there has been constant demand of dowry from the parents of the appellant. It is further 2 FA-14-2015 submitted that respondent has also remarried and photographs thereof have been placed on record alongwith the application for taking additional documents on record.

Shri Dubey, counsel for the appellant further submits that Court below has not appreciated the evidence on record correctly and findings

are perverse therefore, pregnable in nature. Sufficient material was placed to establish cruelty on the part of respondent/husband. Besides the fact of desertion is well explicit as undisputedly both the parties are living separately for last ten years. Impugned judgement of the Family court under such circumstances deserves to be set aside. As there is no possibility of revival of marriage in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the decree for divorce may be granted.

Shri Shukla, counsel for the respondent/husband, per contra denies the allegations made against the respondent; however, he does not dispute that both of them are living separately for last ten years. There is no surviving child out of the wedlock. Shri Shukla also denies that the respondent has been married; however, he has no answer to the photographs shown to him regarding second marriage of respondent.

Heard.

Undisputedly the appellant and respondent are living separately for last ten years immediately after two years of marriage. There is no child born out of the wedlock. Now the distance of time of more than ten years of which there is no love and affection, care and concern, no useful purpose shall be served by maintaining the judgment of the Court below. It is irretrievable break down of marriage. It cannot be revived in the given facts and circumstances. Under such circumstances, it is expedient to grant the decree for divorce.

Consequently marriage between the appellant and respondent is hereby dissolved. Impugned judgement is set aside. Decree for divorce is 3 FA-14-2015

hereby granted under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of desertion.

On the question of alimony, Shri Manas Dubey on instruction received submits that appellant is not expecting anything from the respondent and therefore, in view of the aforesaid, no order in that behalf is passed.

Accordingly, appeal is allowed in above terms and disposed of.

   (ROHIT ARYA)                              (SATISH KUMAR SHARMA)
      JUDGE                                           JUDGE

Rashid

  RASHID KHAN
  2022.01.11 10:36:07
  +05'30'