SHIBANT DUTTA Vs. BIMAL DUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgement and decree dated 22nd August, 2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge 2nd Court at Nadia on Mat. Suit No. 250 of 1999. The plaintiff/husband filed the suit praying for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The petitioner alleged that he was married with the respondent on 13.03.1989 and after marriage the respondent lived together with the petitioner as husband-wife till 08.09.1991. A daughter named Shelly was born out of the said wedlock on 03.11.1990. After several months dispute started and on 08.09.1991 the respondent/wife left the matrimonial home. The wife left the house voluntarily and did not return. She filed maintenance case under section 125 Cr.PC. She also filed criminal complaint under section 498A of IPC and ultimately the said case being G.D. 521/92 under section 498A was heard and disposed of and all the accused persons were acquitted. The petitioner, however, have been paying maintenance in terms of the order passed under section 125 Cr.PC. The learned Trial Judge granted decree of divorce on 22nd August, 2003. The suit was allowed on contest.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the husband has preferred this appeal basically on the ground that the learned Trial Judge misread the evidence and misconstrued the ratio of the judgement reported in 1993 Vol.(1) CHN, 213 and AIR 1985 Delhi 221.

(3.) The learned Counsel submitted mainly on two points - one is cruelty has not been proved and desertion has also not been proved and the reconciliation attempt, which is a must was not done in this case. The learned Counsel argued that had there been any attempt to reconcile, the matter could have been reconciled but the learned Trial Judge fixed different dates for conciliation but did not make any attempt for conciliation.