SHAMPA DATTA Vs. SOUGAT DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. D. K. Daschoudhury, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. A. Sengupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

(2.) By means of this appeal, the judgment and decree respectively dtd. 21/7/2018 and 30/7/2018 delivered in TS(Divorce) 45 of 2015 by the Judge, Family Court, Udaipur, Gomati has been called in question. By the said judgment, the Judge, Family Court has granted the divorce on the ground of cruelty within the ambit of Sec. -13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Judge, Family Court while passing the said judgment has observed that from the evidence it becomes clear that the respondent [the appellant] had stayed in the house of the petitioner [the respondent in this appeal] that one year and few months only and thereafter the parties had been leaving separately for last four years.

(3.) The respondent has asserted in her written statement that though she used to do the household works, yet she did not get any appreciation at all. It is no denying fact that in our society after marriage the bride is to leave her parental home from her matrimonial home and she is to adapt with the environment of her husband and the matrimonial home becomes are abode. It has been further observed that usually nobody demands or accepts any appreciation for working for her own home. Seeking appreciation for works done in own house seems unusual. So the statement made by the respondent, as observed by the Judge, Family Court, indicates that she could not accept the petitioner and his mother as her own and that may be the reason for mad adjustment or the 'epicentre' of their matrimonial dispute. That apart, the Judge, Family Court has observed that since the parties have no child who could have acted as a bridge between the parties, their marital tie suffered severe jolt. Immediately thereafter, the Judge, Family Court has observed that there is no justification to let the brittle and dried up relationship to 'grow'. However, the ground as taken by the respondent herein for granting divorce under Sec. 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 that the appellant had disserted the respondent for a period of more than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petitioner has not been accepted. Thus, the decree of divorce is founded solely on the ground of cruelty.