SUSHIL CHANDRA SEN Vs. CHAMPA SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is husband's appeal under section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (henceforth 'the Act of 1955') assailing the legality and validity of the judgment dated 31.10.2002 rendered in Civil Suit No. 91-A of 2002 by the 5th Additional District Judge, Bilaspur allowing the wife's application under Section 13(1)(i-b) of the Act of 1955 for grant of divorce on the ground of desertion.

(2.) The wife/Respondent moved the subject application with the averment that she and the husband/Appellant were married at Bilaspur on 19.2.1995. Thereafter, she came to her matrimonial house at Ambikapur, but within a short period of 30 days, she was driven out of her matrimonial house because her parents could not fulfil the demands made by the husband/Appellant. Thereafter, she filed a suit, being Civil Suit No. 10-B of 1999 for recovery of dowry items and Stridhan which was decreed in her favour and the husband was directed to pay her Rs. 45,000 in cash and return her jewelleries. A monthly maintenance of Rs. 2,000 was also decreed in her favour. A case was also registered against the husband under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. However, vide judgment dated 7.3.2002, the husband was given benefit of doubt and acquitted of the charges. The husband deserted the wife/Respondent with effect from 11.3.1995. Thereafter, the husband/Appellant has not taken any step to reconcile the issue.

(3.) The husband/Appellant contested the suit and denied the plaint allegations. It was pleaded by the husband that the wife told him that as per the family rituals a newly married wife does not stay at her matrimonial house on the occasion of Holi festival and, therefore, she requested that she be sent to her maternal house. At her own request, he sent her to her maternal house with his younger brother. At that time, along with her, she took her all belongings including jewelleries to her maternal house. It was further pleaded that the wife instituted the suit on false grounds. He also preferred an appeal against the judgment delivered in the said civil suit, which is still pending. In the criminal case registered against him for offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, he has been acquitted. After 11.3.1995, he went to bring the wife/Respondent back many times and also wrote her letters and made telephonic requests in this regard, but she refused to come and did not return. It was the further pleading of the husband that she herself is separately residing at her maternal house without any reasonable ground.