TARUNA KUMAR GADABAD Vs. SUBHALAXMI LENKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful husband has preferred this appeal U/s.19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 challenging the judgment dtd.17.7.2012 passed in C.P. No.140 of 2010 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Khurda in dismissing the petition U/s13(1)(i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce against the wife - respondent.

(2.) The facts not in controversy are that the husband, a service holder under BSNL, married respondent - wife as per Hindu rites and custom on 12.5.2008. Both of them were blessed with a son born on 16.2.2009. The wife stayed for a fortnight in the house of her father-in-law and then was taken by the husband to his service place at Srikakulam. Since 4.7.2008 the petitioner has been staying at his father's house at Bhubaneswar. The divorce petition by husband was filed on 20.4.2010 on the ground of desertion and cruelty.

(3.) Now descending to the controversial facts, the case of husband - petitioner is that wife did not like to reside with the plaintiff in his paternal house for which she was brought to the service place at Srikakulam where he was working as Jr. Accounts Officer of BSNL. The respondent was very adamant. She did not behave properly to his parents. She did not do the household work, did not prepare food in time, did not take care of husband. Instead, over silly matter, she misbehaved not only the husband but also his parents addressing them as stupid, miser, ugly fellow, etc. She insisted for separate residence at Bhubaneswar. The husband did not agree. She left the petitioner at her own sweet will on 4.7.2008. The husband - petitioner took several attempts to get her back but all was in vain. A child was born on 16.2.2009 while she was in her father's house. Such information was not given either to the husband or to his family members. The parents of the husband went to the house of her father where she was staying for SORNAKHETRA day but they were all misbehaved. The local gentries were engaged to find an amicable settlement of the dissention. It yielded no fruit. On 10.01.2010 the plaintiff - husband lastly requested the respondent to join with him. She refused. As a last resort this proceeding for divorce was filed.