RANJUKTA MISHRA Vs. PRAVANJAN MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act has been filed challenging the legality & propriety of the Judgment dated 19.05.2011 passed in C.P. No. 347 of 2010 by the Learned Judge, Family Court, Puri for not delving into the quantum of payment of permanent alimony by Respondent to Appellant & her minor daughter notwithstanding the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. The facts leading to filing of the petition under Section 13(i-A)(ii) for decree of dissolution of marriage by the Respondent in a nutshell are that both the spouses being 'Hindu' were lawfully married according to the Hindu rites on 13.05.2003 & the marriage ceremony was performed in the house of Appellant at village Shukla Brahmanapada & after consummation of marriage out of their wedlock one daughter namely Kajal was born. But the marital life ran into rough weather due the obstinate & non-cooperative attitude of the Appellant. Since the Appellant insisted to live separately from the joint family in her parental house to which the Respondent did not accede to such proposal. On 05.12.2006, the Appellant left the house of the Respondent with her father with ornaments. Since then the Appellant has been living in her parental house. Despite best efforts the Appellant did not join the company of Respondent without any justifiable reason. Since the Appellant has deserted the Respondent & withdrawn from his society without any just cause & the Respondent was deprived of conjugal life, left with no alternative, the Respondent filed a matrimonial case bearing MAT Case No. 176 of 2007 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. The Appellant did not appear in the case, as a result of which said case was decreed ex-parte by Order Dated 20.08.2099 directing the Appellant to join with the company of the Respondent within a month to discharge her marital obligation. In spite of ex-parte Judgment dated 20.08.2009 passed in MAT Case No. 176 of 2007, since the Appellant did not comply the said order, the Appellant initiated litigation in the Court of Learned S.D.J.M., Puri under Section 12 of P.W.D.V. Act vide I.C.C. No. 435 of 2009. Finding no other alternative, the Respondent was constrained to take shelter of this Court by filing the civil proceeding under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

(2.) In response to the notice under Section 13(i-A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Appellant filed the written statement. In the written statement, the factum of marriage dated 13.05.2003 has been admitted by the Appellant. But the Appellant has stated that she was always cooperative & was discharging her marital obligations but due to ill-treatment & mental torture meted out by the Respondent, the Appellant could not stay in the company of the Respondent. It has further been stated in the written statement that the Appellant was not aware of any case under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act. Since no notice was served on the Appellant in the said proceeding nor was aware of any ex-parte Judgment dated 20.08.2009 in MAT Case No. 176 of 2007. Even if any Judgment has been passed in the said proceeding neither the Respondent nor anyone from family made an attempt to take the Appellant to the house of her husband at any point of time. Since physical & mental torture became unbearable, the Appellant was compelled to file I.C.C. Case No. 435 of 2009. It has been stated in the written statement that the Appellant was compelled to remain in her parental house along with her minor daughter as she had no independent means of livelihood. On the other hand, the Respondent is an established businessman at Gop Chhak at Brahmagiri & the Respondent has not taken any care to maintain the Appellant & her minor daughter who is prosecuting her studies in a Public School at Shukla. The parents of the Appellant also made effort to reconcile the matter but the Respondent & his family members deliberately & malafidely neglected & misbehaved the Appellant & her daughter. In the written statement the Appellant has also refuted the allegation of desertions levelled against her before the Learned Judge, Family Court, Puri. The point for determination is whether there has been restitution of conjugal rights between the parties to the marriage for a period of one year or more after passing of decree of restitution of conjugal rights in a proceeding in which they are parties requiring dissolution of marriage? The Appellant & Respondent have been examined as R.W. 1 & P.W. 1 respectively. On perusal of the pleadings from both the sides & scanning through evidence the Learned Judge, Family Court, Puri has been pleased to order that the marriage between the parties is here by dissolved by a decree of divorce vide Judgment dated 19.05.2011 in C.P. No. 347 of 2010.

(3.) Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant & the Respondent in the presence of both the spouses & their daughter.