DEEPAK PADHI Vs. GAYATRI PANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matrimonial appeal is at instance of the husband. It was taken up for hearing yesterday, when we perused the materials in the lower Court record. We adjourned the hearing on prayer of Mr. Mishra, learned advocate appearing for respondent-wife and fixed it today. We had requested Ms. Mohapatra, learned advocate appearing on behalf of appellant-husband to prepare a chart regarding her submission on the course taken by the matrimonial proceeding before the Court below, pursuant to her client's petition being struck off and thereupon restored on payment of arrear maintenance. Mr. Mishra was requested to point out from the written statement his client having said that the marriage was consummated.

(2.) Regarding course taken by the matrimonial proceeding in the Court below on, inter alia, the husband's petition struck down, the sequence of events began with a negotiated marriage solemnized on 5/12/2003. Appellant-husband had alleged that respondent- wife left his Kolkata residence with her parents without his consent, firstly on 15/1/2004 and later, on 29/5/2004. On 22/6/2006 appellant-husband filed for divorce before civil Judge (Senior Division) at Berhampur. Respondent-wife filed for maintenance. On 8/5/2007, civil Judge (Senior Division), Berhampur granted Rs.3,000.00 as maintenance and Rs.5,000.00 litigation cost. Appellant-husband challenged the order by way of revision. Respondent-wife similarly also filed revision for enhancement. By order dtd. 31/8/2010, the learned single Judge enhanced the maintenance to Rs.5,000.00 and the litigation cost to Rs.10,000.00. Ms. Mohapatra produces the order for our perusal. There is no illumination in it of facts in the case leading to the appeal.

(3.) The original matrimonial proceeding was transferred to family Court, Berhampur and registered as C.P. no.38 of 2010. By order dtd. 21/5/2011, the family Court struck down the pleadings of appellant-husband for non-payment of maintenance. Respondent-wife then filed for execution leading to appeal therefrom by appellant- husband. On order dtd. 20/12/2016 the earlier appeal was disposed of and pleadings of appellant-husband in the civil proceeding restored. Sometime in year 2017 respondent-wife filed counter claim praying for decree of restitution of conjugal rights. By impugned judgment dtd. 31/7/2017 the civil proceeding of appellant- husband was dismissed and counter claim of respondent-wife allowed on contest.