SANCHITA PRAMANIK Vs. UJOY PRAMANIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 1st Court at Krishnagar, Nadia in Matrimonial Suit No. 725 of 2010 by which the learned Trial Court dismissed the matrimonial suit which was filed by the appellant/wife against the respondent/husband praying for dissolution of marriage under Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).

(2.) Admittedly, the parties were married according to the Special Marriage Act on 01.10.1999. Appellant/wife prayed for divorce on the ground of cruelty. The case of the appellant/wife is that the marriage between them was solemnized on 01.10.1999 according to Special Marriage Act and thereafter, their marriage was duly solemnized on 28.06.2000 according to Hindu Rites and Customs. Marriage was duly consummated. The Respondent/husband is an Army personnel and at present he is attached with 56 APO, Ranchi, Jharkhand. Some days after their marriage, the respondent/husband started to put tremendous pressure on her to bring money from her father's house for the purpose of constructing a house at Krishnagar town. The appellant/wife wanted to be shifted to his place of service but, the respondent/husband turned down her such proposal. Due to such tremendous pressure, her relatives somehow managed to purchase a piece of land at Ghurni Petni Pukur lane and registered the same in her name and also constructed a pucca house thereon and paid a sum of Rs. 75,000/- to the respondent/husband, as demanded by him. The further case of the appellant/wife is that she started residing in the said house and respondent/husband used to come there occasionally while he was on leave. The appellant/wife has further alleged that the respondent/husband was a drunker and when he used to come to the house, brought his friends and ordered her to serve liquor to them and in case, she denied to do so, the respondent/husband brutally assaulted her. On 11.05.2003 she gave birth to a female child namely, Sarita Pramanik, but, despite the fact the respondent/husband used to put pressure on her to bring money from her father's house as he wanted to construct first floor of the house. But, her relatives failed to fulfill the demand of Rs. 1,50,000/- and as a result of which respondent/husband started to inflict physical and mental torture on her and got associated with various women for leading adulterous life and on being protested by her, respondent/husband used to brutally assault her. The further case of the appellant/wife is that the respondent/husband took a loan by mortgaging the house and demanded a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- from her paternal house but, the respondent/husband collected a fire arm and hurled threats on her to kill her by means of the said fire arm if she failed to bring the money of Rs. 1,50,000/-from her paternal house. Sometime, in the first week of April, 2010, the respondent/husband came to her house and stayed there with her till April 25, 2010. During the period, respondent/husband inflicted tremendous physical and mental torture both on her and her daughter. Further, case of the appellant/wife is that respondent/husband has been trying to marry another woman and openly expressed that he would get Rs. 3,00,000/- as dowry on the marriage with second wife. Despite, several requests made, respondent/husband did not amend his nature and character and all such efforts were in vain. Lastly, on July 26, 2010 respondent/husband hurled threats on her to bring the said money of Rs. 1,50,000/- from any source, otherwise, respondent/husband would kill her and marry another woman. The application for dissolution of marriage was filed in the court of Learned District Judge at Krishnagar, Nadia on 27.07.2010.

(3.) The suit was contested by the respondent/husband by filing written statement contending, inter alia, that the appellant/wife gave tremendous pressure upon him to live separately from his family and in order to purchase a peace in the family, he was compelled to purchase a piece of land at Mouza 96, Radhanagar, in her name and he also paid the loan amount through her brother. Further, case of the respondent/husband is that in the month of July, 2010, he was intimated by the brother of the appellant/wife that she was leading adulterous life with one Anjan Roy and on hearing the same, he come to Krishnagar and knew the fact. Further case of the respondent/husband is that he came to know that the appellant/wife had left her matrimonial house with all her belongings with said Anjan Roy and settled with him in a rented house of Buro Saha at Nagendranagar. The appellant/wife intended to sell out the house i.e. two-storey building and in order to prevent her from making such alienation, he filed a civil suit against appellant/wife and obtained an order of injunction after filing a Misc. appeal in the Court of learned District Judge as learned Trial Court originally refused to grant such order of injunction. The notice of injunction could not be served upon the appellant/wife as she avoided the same by shifting her residence from one place to another. Further, case of the respondent/husband is that the appellant/wife filed several criminal cases against him in order to harass him and to lead adulterous life with said Anjan Roy. In the circumstances, the respondent/husband has prayed for dismissal of the instant Matrimonial Suit with cost.