SAJAL DAS Vs. CHAMPA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 from the judgment dated 28.02.2015 delivered in T.S.(Div) 37 of 2014 by the Judge, Family Court, Udaipur, Gomati Judicial District.

(2.) By the said judgment, the Judge, Family Court dismissed the suit for divorce as brought by the appellant on the ground of cruelty and desertion having observed that the appellant has failed to prove that the respondent treated him with cruelty after marriage. It has been further observed in the said judgment that by violating the terms and conditions of promise that was entered between the parties, the appellant refused to reunite with the respondent and to restitute their conjugal life. Thus, the ground for desertion has fallen through. The said judgment has been challenged in the present appeal. For purpose of appreciating the grounds as adverted in the memorandum of appeal it is apposite to introduce the relevant facts material for the purpose. The appellant has complained that after their marriage on 10.03.2010 they led their matrimonial life for some weeks. However, in the wedlock, one female child was born. On the day of presenting the suit, the said girl child, namely Samudrita Das was aged about 2 years 8 months. The allegations are broadly that the respondent is obdurate and not prone to adjustment. The appellant has been treated with serious mental and physical cruelty. The respondent did not allow the appellant to take rest or to take proper sleep by using abusive slang languages. The respondent had provoked him to commit suicide or else, she would file a case for commission of offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC. The respondent was, according to the appellant, reluctant to discharge her duties in the matrimonial home. Often times she used to misbehave with the appellant. Since she was pressing him for separating the mess, the appellant shifted their residence to a rented house on 06.05.2011. Even the respondent filed a written complaint to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udaipur, South Tripura, as he then was, on 31.03.2012. The said complaint dated 31.03.2012 was sent to the Officer-in-Charge, R.K. Pur Police Station. Based on the said complaint, RK Pur P.S. case No.130 of 2012 under Sections 498- A and 201 of the IPC was registered against the appellant and other inmates. The said case being PRC 202 of 2012 under Section 498-A of the IPC was disposed of by the judgment dated 03.01.2013 on acquitting the appellant and others. Thereafter, the respondent refused to restitute the conjugal life with the appellant. Thus, the marital tie has been perceived to have irretrievably broken. Apart from the said criminal proceeding being PRC 202 of 2012, the respondent had instituted a proceeding under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. for her maintenance being Criminal Misc. FC/UDP/69/2012 before the Judge, Family Court, Udaipur, Tripura. The Judge, Family Court ordered the maintenance @Rs.4000/- per month for the respondent. Against the order of maintenance dated 18.02.2013, the appellant preferred a revision petition in the court of the Sessions. Hearing of the said revision was taken up by the Additional Sessions Judge. The Additional Sessions Judge had ordered in the said criminal revision petition No.24 of 2013 as follows:

(3.) By filing the written statement, the respondent had contested the pleadings of the appellant and stated that the appellant was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC but having an eye to the matrimonial relation between the appellant and the respondent, the case was ended on a compromise after administering serious admonition to the appellant. Thereafter, it has been contended that since the appellant neglected to maintain the respondent and their child, the respondent was persuaded to file a petition for maintenance.