FAO No. 100-M of 2003 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh FAO No. 100-M of 2003 (O&M) Date of decision : 11.3.2010 Lal Chand ... Appellant vs Savita .... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Manoj Tanwar, Advocate for Mr. N. S. Shekhawat, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Kamal Kant Verma, Advocate, for the respondent. Rajesh Bindal J. The husband is in appeal before this court challenging the judgment and decree of the learned court below whereby in a petition filed by the respondent wife under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, “the Act”), a decree of divorce was granted on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The marriage between the parties was solemnised on 11.2.1997 at Village Hasanpur. After the marriage, the parties resided in their matrimonial home at Village Nawadi. No child was born out of the wedlock. It is alleged by the respondent wife that in the year 1998 at the time of Raksha Bandan, she had been left at her parental home and not brought back by the appellant-husband. Thereafter, even with the intervention of the respectables also the respondent tried to persuade him to take her back, but the appellant did not mend his ways. Under the circumstances, the respondent filed the petition before the court below on 2.2.2002 in which on account of non-payment of the maintenance fixed, the learned court below struck off the defence of the appellant and while relying upon the evidence led by the respondent, a decree of divorce on account of cruelty and desertion was passed. FAO No. 100-M of 2003 -2- In support of the petition, the respondent appeared in person. Her statement was corroborated by her mother PW2 Reshmi and two other independent witnesses. As the defence of the appellant was struck off, no evidence was led by him. On account of the evidence led by the respondent, it was proved on record that the respondent was treated with cruelty. With regard to the finding of desertion also the position remained the same where the stand of the respondent that after Raksha Bandan in the year 1998, the appellant did not make any effort to take her back to the matrimonial home and since then she has been deserted, was also proved. Considering the aforesaid material on record, no case for interference with the judgment and decree of the court below is made out. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 11.3.2010 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge