SUJATA MOHANTY Vs. RUDRA CHARAN MOHANTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent's application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 praying for decree of divorce having been allowed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in Civil Proceeding No.792 of 2004, the appellant has filed the present appeal.

(2.) The case of the respondent, who was the petitioner before the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in the above noted Civill Proceeding is that he married the appellant on 30.01.2001 at the appellant's residence at Banei. Prior to marriage, the appellant was serving as an Assistant Teacher at Town U.P. School in Banei. After solemnisation of marriage, both the parties lived as husband and wife and later, the appellant left for her service place at Banei. After some months of marriage, the appellant instigated the respondent to come and live at Banei permanently to which the respondent refused as he belonged to a joint family consisting of the elder brothers, their wives, children and his widow mother. During School Vacation and Holidays, the appellant-wife never came to Athagarh and on the eve of each such Vacation, the appellant-wife used to phone to respondent-husband to come to Banei. In such background, with much reluctance, the respondent used to go to Banei and when there he tried to bring her (appellant) to Athagarh, she (appellant) used to pick up quarrel and become furious. In one or two occasions when the appellant-wife came to reside Athagarh she never did any household work and never took care of her old widow mother-in-law. When the respondent suggested the appellant to do household work, the appellant quarrelled with family members of the respondent. Though the appellant was provided treatment for ovary infection, but she avoided taking any medicine as she was not willing to become a mother. The appellant visited Athagarh last in 2003 in Dasahara vacation when her mother-in-law was to undergo the eye operation at Cuttack. When the respondent-husband proposed the appellant-wife to attend her mother-in-law at Cuttack, she turned down the said proposal. Thus, since Dasahara festival 2003, the respondent had no sexual relationship with the appellant. Despite invitation by the sister and brother-in-law of the appellant at Banei to attend their daughter's marriage, she did not attend the marriage function held in July, 2004. She refused the invitation by saying that she would not go to Athagarh in her life time. On 12.12.2004, the old widow mother of the respondent went to Banei to bring her to Athagarh for X-mas vacation but the appellant misbehaved with her saying that she would not return to Athagarh as she was not dependant on them. On account of all these, the respondent along with his family members suffered enormous mental pain and agony. According to the appellant, all these constituted the mental cruelty inflicted on him by the appellant and as such, it was not possible to live with her and lead a conjugal life.

(3.) The appellant contested the case by filing the written statement. The case of the appellant is that marriage was solemnised on 30.1.2001 at Banei. Before marriage, it was duly informed to the respondent and his family members that she was serving as a teacher at Banei. It was initially decided that the respondent would make efforts to transfer the appellant to any school in Athagarh so that she could live at Athagarh permanently. As per the demand of appellant, his uncle and brother and her father was forced to give items indicated in Schedule-A of the written statement. Though after marriage after staying for sometime at Athagarh, she returned to Banei, however, she was regularly going to Athagarh in each short/long vacation and sometime also by taking leave. She never compelled the respondent to stay with her at Banei. She never quarrelled with the respondent. She was frequently coming to Athagarh and taking all care of her mother-in-law and doing household work. She also used to serve foods to all the family members of the respondent whenever it was required and she was never adament at any time. She was taking proper medicine as per the advice of the doctor and never neglected it. The case of the abortion was an unfortunate incident and beyond the control of the appellant. She never avoided any treatment and it is not correct to say that she did not want to be a mother. It is incorrect to say that the appellant last visited Athagarh in Dasahara in 2003. In fact she attended the eye operation of her mother-in-law and she never neglected her. She also denied the allegation that since Dasahara 2003, there has not been any sexual relationship between her and her husband. With regard to the marriage function of the niece of the respondent in July, 2004, her stand was during entire Summer Vacation of 2004, she stayed at Athagarh but after reopening of the school she could not get leave from the school for which she was not able to attend the above noted marriage function. The respondent's sister and brother-in-law had never come to Banei personally to invite her for the above noted marriage. She never instigated him nor humiliated him nor any of his family members. Her mother-in-law had never gone to Banei on 19.12.2004 to bring her to Athagarh. She has never threatned the respondent or his family members to prosecute them if the respondent failed to join her at Banei. She never misbehaved with respondent a caused mental agony to him.