LAWS(ALL)-1983-9-3

MAYA CHATTERJI Vs. SHIV CHANDRA CHATTERJI

Decided On September 21, 1983
MAYA CHATTERJI Appellant
V/S
SHIV CHANDRA CHATTERJI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a first appeal by the wife against the decree of divorce that was passed against her on 16th July, 1970 by the court of the Additional District Judge Jhansi, on the ground that she had deserted the petitioner, her husband for more than five years when the petition was filed in the year 1970.

(2.) The petitioner husband, who is the respondent in the appeal, did not appear at the hearing in spite of due service of the notice of the appeal on him. The parties were married at Gwalior on 3rd Dec. 1965. The appellant was aged about 32 years and the petitioner was aged about 37 years at the time of their marriage. The appellant's father was dead and her mother was in poor circumstances. The appellant was accordingly living under the protection of her step-sister's husband Pulin Behari who was impleaded as a co-respondent in the divorce petition on the ground that he had illicit connection with the appellant since before the marriage; his wife, the appellant's step-sister, having died some 7 years before. It is said that the appellant came away from Jhansi where the petitioner was posted at that time with Pulin Behari, on 15th Dec. 1965 and was living with him ever since and had not returned back. It was the petitioner's case that the appellant was pregnant even at the time of marriage. The appellant and her co-respondent Pulin Behari both filed written statements. Pulin Behari died during the pendency of the suit in the trial court itself. It is not necessary in this case to reproduce the pleadings of the parties in any great detail. The following were the issues on which the parties went to trial, namely:-1. Whether the defendant is living in adultery with defendant No. 2 as alleged by the plaintiff. If so, its effect? 2. Whether the plaintiff has abandoned the defendant as alleged in para 51 of the W. S.? If so, its effect?

(3.) To what relief, if any is the plaintiff entitled?