KAMALIKA MAJUMDAR NEE DAS Vs. SUBHAPRIYA MAJUMDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, brought by Smt. Kamalika Das @ Kamalika Majumdar, the appellant/wife, challenges the Judgment and Decree dated November 21, 2019, and December 18, 2019, rendered by the Learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court at Barrackpore. The impugned decision, arising from Matrimonial Suit No. 912 of 2012, dissolved the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce. The appellant asserts that the learned Trial Court fundamentally misconstrued both factual realities and governing legal principles, thereby necessitating a comprehensive review by this Court.

(2.) The marital journey, which forms the genesis of this dispute, commenced on January 21, 2010, with a solemnization at Dakshineswar Maa Kali Temple, followed by registration on April 17, 2010. A male child was born to the couple on September 30, 2010. While the husband claimed to have disclosed his divorcee status prior to the marriage, this very assertion would later become a contentious battleground. Conjugal life began at the husband's residence in Agarpara, but the marital harmony proved fleeting. Within a mere six months, on July 14, 2010, the wife departed the matrimonial home, an act that undeniably ignited the present matrimonial dispute.

(3.) The husband initiated Matrimonial Suit No. 912 of 2012, seeking the dissolution of his marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, as defined under Sec. 13(1)(ia) and Sec. 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. His petition painted a picture of distress, alleging that shortly after the marriage, the wife denied conjugal rights, employed "filthy language," and exhibited marked disrespect towards him and his elderly septuagenarian mother. A substantial part of his claim rested on the wife's purported neglect of household duties, attributed to her singular prioritization of her legal profession as a practising advocate. He further accused her of repeatedly threatening to file false cases, threats which, he contended, materialized into concrete actions, culminating in a false complaint under Sec. 498A IPC (Ghola P.S. Case No. 468/10). Most significantly, he asserted that a false report lodged by her with his employer purportedly led to his job termination, causing him immense mental agony and severe reputational damage. According to the husband, these cumulative actions constituted profound mental and emotional torment, compelling him to seek the dissolution of their marital bond.