ATANU DAS Vs. SMT. SOMA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed in Matrimonial Suit No.48 of 1998 of the Court of learned Additional District Judge, First Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas, under section 27 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, thereby dismissing the suit on contest with costs.

(2.) The case of the petitioner/appellant/husband, Atanu Das, is that he married Smt. Soma Das, the respondent under Special Marriage Act, on 4th Feb., 1988. After such marriage, they began to live as husband and wife peacefully in the rented house at Satindra Palli. P.S. Regent Park, Kolkata. It may be noted that the elder brother of the appellant married the respondent's sister prior to their marriage. The appellant was an employee under the Postal Department and was appointed on compassionate ground on the death of his father. In the year 1992, the appellant was detected to suffer from Pulmonary Tuberculosis and he remained admitted in the hospital at Kalyani, Nadia from 13th Oct., 1992 to 22nd July, 1993. After a few days of his admission in the hospital, a daughter was born in the wedlock on 28th Oct., 1992. After the birth of the child, the respondent/wife began to reside at her father's place at Haitu, P.S. Kasba. The appellant/husband after discharge from the hospital went to his father-in-law's place for bringing back his wife and daughter, but the respondent's mother refused to send her daughter. Ultimately, on 7th, June 1994, the respondent came back to her matrimonial home, but began to insist on selling the appellant's land and purchasing another house nearer to her father's place, to which the husband disagreed. This gave rise to quarrel between them. Ultimately, on 16th June, 1994, the respondent left for her father's place again along with her daughter, and thereafter, despite further requests by the husband and his relatives and friends, and sending of lawyer's letter, she did not come back. The respondent treated her husband with cruelty and his family members and also deserted him, for which the appellant filed this suit for dissolution of the marriage under section 27(1) of the Special Marriage Act 1954 on the ground of cruelty and desertion.

(3.) On the other hand, the respondent/wife's case, as made out in the written statement, was that the respondent wanted to go to her matrimonial home with the child, but the petitioner and his family members never agreed to bring back his wife when she had to bring a case for maintenance for herself and her child under section 125 Cr. PC. In fact, the respondent wanted to live with her husband at her matrimonial home, but the appellant advised her to go to her father's place along with the child. The husband himself being the wrongdoer, the respondent cannot be said to have dealt the appellant with cruelty nor can she be said to have deserted her husband.