SAGARIKA MAHAPATRA Vs. SAMIR KUMAR MAHAPATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-wife is before us in appeal preferred against judgment dtd. 16/7/2019 of the Family Court, decreeing restitution on petition filed by respondent-husband. Mr. Jalli, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant-wife but none appears on behalf of respondent-husband though he had entered appearance through learned advocates. Order sheet bears several orders made in giving opportunity for respondent-husband to be represented/ appear. In the circumstances, granting further adjournment would be injustice to appellant-wife, who wants to prosecute the appeal.

(2.) Mr. Jalli submits, his client is not opposed to reconciliation. However, it cannot and must not be on direction of the Family Court by impugned judgment, wherein the Court found neither of the parties could prove their allegation against the other. Respondent-husband was not able to prove but his client laid cogent evidence to show dowry demands having had been made and inhuman torture on her, causing her to leave the matrimonial home with the minor son. On query from Court Mr. Jalli submits, respondent-husband has made no effort to even contact the son. He, however reiterates, the marriage can be salvaged.

(3.) We reproduce below paragraph-8 from impugned judgment.