A Petition For Divorce Us 13 Of The Hindu Marriage Act 1955 1109 - Legal Draft

     according to the Hindu religion, vaidic rites and ceremonies.
2. That the respondent, prior to the marriage, was known by her maiden name as Miss Mona, while there is no change resulted by the marriage in the name of the petitioner.
3. That the petitioner being the ordinary resident of the Pune City and having habitation at the address given in the title part, after the said marriage, the respondent accompanied the petitioner to Pune and started cohabitation from       
4. That, however, right from the beginning, the respondent was reluctant to reside at Pune and not so responsive to cohabit with the petitioner, and every now and then, on one or the other pretext, she used to go to the place of her parents and stay there for long stretches of time. Having come to Pune for the first time, on    , the respondent went back to her parental home immediately on    , and thereafter, she did not turn up till        , and then also stayed with the petitioner only for a period of about ten days, and on    , she went back to Gulbarga to her parents. Thereafter, the respondent did not turn up till       , and having come to Pune on      , after song a time, she lived at Pune only upto          , and again, on   , she left Pune for her parental home, and, thereafter, she ha never turned up as yet.
5. That during this period, every time, the respondent pleaded some or the other excuse to go from Pune early and then sent messages and letters advancing lame excuses for her prolonged stays at Gulbarga, and, thus, right from the beginning, the respondent did never realise her marital obligations, nor did she ever bother to consider the feelings of the petitioner and the members of his family for the reasons best known to herself.
6. That the petitioner is a young man practising medical profession, and the very idea of marrying the respondent was that, if both of them being medical practitioners start a joint practice, they can do something in life with a greater advantage.
7. That, however, despite all the educational background, the respondent had been so non-considerate and negligible towards the planning of the future and establishing a joint practice that she has done everything to disturb the mental peace and well being of the petitioner and nothing to plan the future joint life.
8. That the petitioner and the members of his family, despite all these responsible defects on the part of the respondent and in the hope that the. respondent by herself or the members of her family would realise the situation and one day or the other, the wiser counsel would prevail and she would behave in a more responsible way and discharge her matrimonial obligations properly. However, all these hopes proved to be in vain.
9. That the respondent, right from the beginning, appears to have some plans of harassing the petitioner, and this would be clear from the letters, which she had written either to this petitioner or his father, and from these letters, it would appear that though the petitioner and the members of his family were eager to have her back and were all along inviting her to be at Pune, the respondent was under the pretext of innocence and education writing such letters and pleading such excuses for her delayed stays there that from them, the petitioner and the members of his family became apprehensive about the true intentions of the respondent, and, hence, the petitioner attempted to persuade the respondent to resume cohabitation and besides writing letters had deputed his relations to visit the respondent and her parents.
10. That accordingly, the petitioner's paternal uncle and the petitioner's mother's sister's son, viz. Shri APP and RAN, and these relations had gone to the respondent's father's house, and they saw the respondent's brother and mother. However, though the respondent was very much present there, she refused to see these relations, and the mother and the brother did not tell these relations of the petitioner that nothing could be done by them in the matter, and they would convey the petitioner's message to the respondent, and, thus, in a most indecent manner, the respondent had sent back the said relations. Yet, the petitioner did not lose either head or heart, and with a view to trying again, the respondent deputed the abovementioned two persons and his brother, Dr. ASP and two others.
11. That these people visited the place of the respondent's father, on   However, they were told that the respondent was out of station, and the parents and the brother of the respondent were not in a position either to tell her whereabouts, or the time when she would be back, and hence, these relations had to come back to Pune.
12. That it is the reliable information of the petitioner that the respondent lives with her parents only, but the respondent as well as her parents and brother were playing these tricks and telling lies just to thwart the sincere attempts of the petitioner for cohabitation.
13. That helpless in the matter, yet sincere in his intentions and attempts, the petitioner, through his lawyer, sent a notice, on        , to the respondent, a copy whereof was sent to the respondent under certificate, besides the original being sent by registered post acknowledgement due. The copies sent under certificate of posting were duly delivered to the respondent. However, she had not accepted the notice sent by registered post acknowledgement due. and accordingly, the envelope was received back with postal remarks "Addressee out of station", and in the situation, the said notice was again dispatched in the similar manner and received back with the similar remarks, and, thus, this is clear that the respondent having already learnt that the petitioner had taken the matter seriously and was inclined to take further action, if the respondent were not to resume cohabitation, the respondent has evaded the service of the said notice.
14. That the petitioner had all along been very kind, sincere and loving husband. However, the respondent did not at all respond or reciprocate these feelings dutifully, and during the total period of matrimony, the respondent has hardly lived at the petitioner's place for a period of sixteen days, and since     , she has deserted the petitioner, and hence, this petition.
15. That the petitioner's father had made for the respondent ornaments weighing about 65 gms, and the respondent had taken all these ornaments with herself, and the petitioner learns that presently she is employed as a doctor drawing a handsome salary, and the respondent's father and brother are rich people, and perhaps, it is the wealth and the means available to her that she has been deserting the petitioner.
16. That the cause of action for the present petition first arose on      and, again, on   , when the period of two years of desertion was completed, and, hence, there is no undue delay in the presentation of this petition.
17. That the parties, after the said marriage, last resided together at Pune within the local limits of the jurisdiction of this Court, and hence, this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction top try and decide this petition.
18. That the parties hereto have been residing separately for the last more than two years, and hence, this petition is maintainable.
19. That this petition being chargeable with a fixed rate of court fee, the same is paid herewith.
20. That the petitioner, therefore, prays that -
(a) The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent be dissolved by a decree of divorce;
(b ) If the Hon'ble Court were to decline the relief prayed for in clause (a) above, alternatively, the petitioner prays that a decree for judicial separation be passed; and
(c) Any other orders in the interest of justice be kindly passed.
Pune,
Sd/- ASP
Dated:             PETITIONER
Sd/- xXx ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER