SHRIPAL MESHRAM Vs. URMILA MESHRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the appellant/husband under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 would call in question the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court, Rajnandgaon, refusing to dissolve marriage between the parties.

(2.) Earlier by judgment and decree dated 27-10-2014 passed by the Family Court, Rajnandgaon, in civil suit No.72-A/2011 allowed the suit of the husband (appellant herein) to dissolve the marriage between the parties. However, in FAM No.112 of 2014 preferred by the wife (respondent herein) the judgment and decree was set aside by this Court vide judgment dated 7-7-2017 and the matter was remitted back to the trial Court for rendering fresh judgment. The remand order was made for the reason that on the earlier occasion the trial Court had only reproduced all statements of witnesses made in the affidavit under Order 18 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the CPC') and recorded finding in respect of cruelty without any discussion or appreciation of evidence. This Court found that in most of the paragraphs either pleadings have been reproduced or the statements made by the parties under Order 18 Rule 4 of the CPC were reproduced.

(3.) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the parties were married as per the customs and rites prevailing amongst Budda tribes in February, 2004. Two children namely; Tanishk and Divyanshi are born out of their wedlock. The respondent-wife left the matrimonial house and the company of the appellant-husband in July, 2010 and since thereafter she is residing with her children at Basantpur, Ward No.38, Rajnandgaon. At the time of marriage, the appellant was serving as Constable in 8th Battalion, Reserve Police, Rajnandgaon, whereas the respondent was working as Shiksha Karmi Grade III at Fafammar, therefore, the appellant obtained a house on rent at village Gendatola for her residence. In the initial stage of marriage their relation was normal, but, according to the appellant, after about six months, the respondent's behavior became cruel.