RATNAMAYEE DAS Vs. BIKASH DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER the commencement of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), any party to marriage, solemnized before or after the commencement of the Act, has been given the right to apply for a decree for judicial reparation on one or more of the six grounds as mentioned in section 10 of the said act. The first ground is based on desertion which includes neglect. We are not concerned with that ground in this case. The second ground is based on cruelty and such as would induce a reasonable apprehension of harm or injury. The cruelty as involved in the second ground may be both mental and physical. In this appeal, which has been taken against the judgment and decree dated 27th August, 1981 and 3rd September, 1981 respectively, as made and passed in Matrimonial Suit No. 139 of 1979, by Shri S. K. Mitra, the learned Judge, 9th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta, we are really concerned with such second ground and not with any other ground. Even, on the basis of the concessions, as made by Mr. Chakraborty, the learned Advocate for the appellant, we are also not required to consider the case of physical cruelty, if any caused to the wife, the petitioner appellant, who instituted the concerned proceedings against the husband, Opp. party/respondent on 17th August, 1979, under section 10 of the said Act.

(2.) THE appellant, who instituted the proceeding as mentioned above, stated that the marriage between her and the husband, was solemnized on 24th May, 1971 at her father's residence at 15a, Balaram Ghosh Street, P. S. Shyampukur, calcutta, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies and after such marriage, she lived with her husband at 14/1, Krishna Ram Ghosh Street, P. S. Shyampukur, Calcutta, till 31st January, 1979. It has also been stated that out of such wedlock, a female child was born and on the date of institution of the proceedings, she was 3 years of the factum of marriage, the solemnization thereof, and the other factors viz the parties living together after such marriage as mentioned hereinbefore, was not denied by the Respondent husband but he stated that the daughter as claimed was Jhampa or Jilli was really not of three years age as claimed, but heir date of birth was 26th June, 1976.

(3.) THE appellant/petitioner in her pleadings, claimed that her married life was most unhappy ever since the marriage or throughout, as the Respondent husband used to abuse her in most insulting languages in the presence of other inmates of the family, apart from torturing her quite often, both physically and mentally and he also behaved roughly and treated her with great harshness, wilful negligence and cruelty. It was her further case that on 21st january, 1979, the Respondent husband assaulted her mercilessly with fists and blows and threatened to kill her with hired goondas. The petitioner wife, further claimed the Respondent husband, to be an ill-tempered man and also claimed that he was addicted to gambling, drinking and races. It was her further grievance that the Respondent husband quite often used to come at midnight and even then, on slightest protest, he used to illtreat her with filthy languages or with such languages which were unworthy of a gentleman. It was the further allegation of the petitioner wife that from the words and the deeds of the Respondent husband, it was clear, that he had no heart nor any love and affection for her. The allegations as indicated hereinbefore, if not categorically, were denied by the respondent husband. He further claimed that those allegations were made by the petitioner wife, to suit her evil design against him.