PABITRA KUMAR BOSE Vs. GOURI BOSE (NEE GHOSH)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is at the instance of the husband who was the respondent in a petition filed by the petitioner wife for dissolution of their marriage on the ground that the present appellant had treated her, the wife, with cruelty since solemnization of their marriage. The decision of the case depended upon the assessment of evidence mainly oral in nature and after giving reasons the learned Additional District Judge has believed the case of the respondent and has passed a decree in her favour. Having ourselves considered the pleadings and the evidence on the record we agree with the court below that the petitioner wife, respondent herein, is entitled to a decree under section 13 (1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

(2.) On 5th March, 1953 the marriage between the parties according Hindu rites was solemnized at Tallygunge, district 24 Parganas. It is further in evidence that after her marriage the present respondent who was the petitioner in the court below had taken further studies and had become a graduate. Two daughters were born out of the said wedlock. It is practically the common case that there had been constant quarrel between the parties and according to the respondent wife was founded on the allegation that in May 1977 her husband had driven her away and she had only returned on the eve of the marriage of their elder daughter which took place on the 16th Dec., 1978. It is also in evidence that on or about 17th April, 1980 the present respondent had finally left her husband's house. Debalina Bose, the youngest daughter of the parties, who was examined as D.W. 2 on behalf of the present appellant, denied the case of her mother that her father used to beat her and on one occasion had cut hair of her mother but had admitted that her mother had left their house in 1971 on the ground that she got service in a school at Burdwan. In May 1977 her father had asked her mother to give up service and there was exchange of words. Her mother had gone away to her father's house taking a steel trunk with her. Again she had come back. D.W. 2 also admitted that in April 1978 she had left, But she had denied that prior to her departure her mother was assaulted by her father.

(3.) We have also considered the evidence given by the side of the present respondent wife. In our view, the said evidence appears to be more acceptable. It is difficult to accept the case of the present appellant that his wife had left although he did not misbehave. The respondent wife had alleged that on 5th and 7th April, 1980 her husband had assaulted her. Again on 17th April 1980 he had assaulted her. Merely because she made apparently a mistake in stating the name of the maid servant who had witnessed these occurrences. We are not prepared to totally reject the evidence of Arati Manna, P.W. 5 of Arati's claim that she was at the relevant time employed in the house of the appellant has been corroborated by Debalina D.W. 2. There are also certain passage in the evidence of the appellant himself which indicated that at least for sometime said Arati was employed in his house. He had himself admitted that P.W. 5 had come to his house with his elder daughter. In April 1980 according to the appellant his daughter had stayed in his house.