VIJAYKUMAR RAMCHANDRA BHATE Vs. NEELA VIJAYKUMAR BHATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above appeals have been filed by the husband, who lost before both the courts challenging the orders granting dissolution of the marriage solemnized between parties on 10th June, 1973 at the instance of the respondent wife and dismissing the petition filed by the appellant seeking for the relief of restitution of conjugal rights and custody of the two daughters. The wife filed M.J. Petition No. 832 of 1983 under Section 13(1)(1-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for dissolution of the marriage and grant of divorce on the ground of cruelty said to have been meted out to the wife. In support of her claim, the wife narrated several instances of harassment and nagging attitude, which caused her mental agony and serious set back in health. These were ultimately considered and viewed by the learned Family Court Judge to be mere normal wear and tear of marital life. But at the same time, the allegations made by the husband, extensively with enumeration of instances and incidents against wife branding her as an unchaste woman, keeping illicit relations - sexually and otherwise with one Ramesh Sawant, the son of a neighbour, though subsequently withdrawn by seeking an amendment of the written statement, weighed with the Court to uphold the claim of the wife for divorce. The manner of narration and claims of such allegations in the written statement was also considered to be per se indicative of the fact that he made such allegations against her not only when they were living together but also to her relatives, friends and persons whom he had contacted for reconciliation. The learned trial Judge was also of the view that notwithstanding the withdrawal, in a reply filed on 17-1-1990 also, those allegations were considered to have been substantially reiterated by the husband. Consequently, the Family Court allowed M.J. Petition No. 382 of 1983 on 7-4-1994. As a sequel to the same, the application in M.J. Petition No. 66 of 1988 filed by the husband for restitution of conjugal rights and custody of the daughters tried simultaneously with the other petition came to be rejected by a separate order on that very date of judgment granting dissolution of marriage between parties.

(2.) The appellant filed Family Court Appeal No. 56 of 1994 against the dismissal of M.J. Petition No.66 of 1988 and Family Court Appeal No. 57 of 1994 against the order granting divorce in M.J. Petition No. 382 of 1983 filed by the wife. The Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay passed a detailed judgment in FCA No. 57 of 1994 affirming the order of the family court granting divorce and rejected the appeal on 4-10-2000. At the same time, by a separate order the other appeal in FCA No. 56 of 1994 was also dismissed, on the same date. Consequently, these appeals came to be filed by the husband.

(3.) Though notice was served in the appeals on the respondent, she did not choose to enter appearance in person or through counsel. But she had sent a reply contesting the claims of the appellant in the appeals filed before this Court.