SUDESHNA KAR Vs. ABHIJIT KAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Ld. Additional District Judge, l1th Court, Alipore in Matrimonial Suit No. 13 of 1986.

(2.) The husband-respondent' filed the suit for divorce against the wife appellant on the ground of cruelty. The husband is a N. V. S. C. and is in service in New India Insurance Company Ltd,. The wife is a lecturer of Gokhale Memorial Girls' College. The marriage between the parties took place on 5.5.82. Husband's case was that there was some son of feeling between husband and wife immediately after the marriage but it soon became bitter. The wife refused to accompany him to Patna where he was posted. The wife had no love and respect to the parents of the husband and used to despise them as they had little cultural background and came from an upstart family. The husband came to Calcutta on 1.8.83 on transfer and while he was living in his father's place at Park Circus she stayed there for a short while living mostly at her father's house. The wife however, gave birth to a male child on 26.9.83, but even after the birth of the child she never cared to stay permanently with her husband even during her short stay at the husband's house. She never cared to look after the comforts of her husband's or her parents-in-law. The wife repeatedly insisted the husband to arrange for a separate flat and live there separately from his parents. The husband refused to oblige the wife as he was not willing to stay away from his parents. The husband alleged that the wife used to render extreme mental torture upon his as she was never willing to give her company to her husband or to live with him. After much persuasion the wife came to stay in her husband's father's house at Salt Lake on 1.4.84 but after staying there only for four days she suddenly left her matrimonial home on 5.4.84 without any reason whatsoever and since then, inspite of repeated requests, she did never come back to her husband's home. Since then she also did not allow her husband to see their child. The wife wrote threatening letters to husband while she stayed in her husband's house at Park Circus for short time. She used to pick up quarrels with the member of her husband's family on slightest pretext. According to the husband the wife thus failed to fulfill her matrimonial obligation to her husband by giving him her company. The wife also used to write letters 2o his Office boss so that he may loose his job and his career would be doomed. The husband on such allegations prayed for decree for divorce against the wife and also prayed for the custody of the child in the other suit.

(3.) The wife in her written statements denied the allegations of the plaint. She alleged that her behaviour to the members of the husband's family was quite cordial at the relevant time and she always did her best to make them happy and comfortable. She further stated that she used to contribute Rs. 600/- per month from her pay to her father-in-law for the family. She stated that after the marriage the parents of her husband wanted that she would give whatsoever she was earning to her parent-in-laws to which she could not agree. She further alleged drat from the beginning the husband's mother was unkind to the new bore child and expressed her inability to attend to the child when she had to go to College for her duty. For that reason one Aya had to be engaged for the child. She '.admitted that she used to leave the house of her husband's sometimes due to paucity of accommodation in that house. The husband's father demanded a loan of Rs. 15,000/- from the wife to which she could not agree. There was a quarrel and the wife was compelled to leave the house of her husband. She denied that, she ever failed to discharge her marital obligation towards her husband. She further stated that out of sheer fear of physical harm and injury, she has forced to leave the house of her husband on 5.4.84. She denied that she ever insisted for a separate flat for them. She also denied she ever made any complaint against her husband to his higher officers in his Office. She stated that she is ever willing and ready to go her husband's house but her husband was neither ready and willing to take her there nor to live together as husband and wife. The wife also prayed that their child may be given to her custody.