MONIDEEPA KAR @ MONIDEEPA DEY Vs. SANJIB DEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 24.05.2011, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Cachar, Silchar in FC (Civil) Case ho. 167/2006, dissolving the marriage between the parties, the wife is in appeal. By order dated 27.07.2011, rendered in MC No. 2146/2011, the operation of this decision had been stayed. We have heard Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the appellant/wife and Mr. HRA Choudhury, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. R. Choudhury, for the respondent/husband.

(2.) The pleaded case of the respondent/husband before the learned Court below in his application filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereafter for short referred to as the Act), is that following his marriage with the appellant/wife on 25.02.2011 as per Hindu religious rites and rituals, he brought his newly married wife to his ancestral home at Lala in the district of Hailakandi. He alleged that from the very beginning, the appellant/wife expressed her displeasure and disgust qua his standard of living and openly humiliated him and his family members and relatives. She maintained this disposition, according to him also during the post marriage customary celebrations. The respondent/husband averred that at the time of marriage, he was serving as Inspecting Auditor under District Elementary Education Officer at Karimganj and the appellant/husband as Teacher in Govt. High School at Borkhola of Cachar District and, as such, for her convenience he brought her to Karimganj so as to facilitate the process of her adjustment with the new life. According to the respondent/husband, however, the appellant/wife maintained the same conduct and behaviour and used to create unpleasant situations and often misbehaved with his colleagues. According to him, she refused to prepare tea for his friends and guests, though invited with her consent which made to feel him very small before all concerned. The respondent/husband also averred that the appellant/wife got her first child aborted against his consent and during his absence due to election duty during the State Assembly Elections in the year 2001. She not only refused to accompany him to Mumbai at the time of the treatment of his father, who was suffering from cancer stating that she was not supposed to perform the duty of nurse, but also misbehaved with his parents when they visited his ancestral home Hailakandi on the occasion of their first marriage anniversary. The respondent also alleged that the appellant/wife did not attend the rituals arranged by his parents for the welfare of the child while she was in the family way for the second time and instead left his ancestral house on 27.02.2002 with her mother inspite of the disapproval of his parents, not to return thereafter. According to the respondent/husband, he was also not informed about the birth of their female child and when, much later, on receiving the news, he went to the house of the appellant/wife's father to see the baby, he was refused the sight of the child and was instead threatened by her family members of physical assault. Situated thus, the respondent sought for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion.

(3.) The appellant/wife in her written statement denied the allegations levelled against her and instead pleaded that as demanded by the respondent, in two phases, installments of Rs. 20,000/-, were paid to him, this being an addition to the articles given in the marriage. According to the appellant, the respondent/husband also asked her to deposit her salary in the name of his mother and also instructed her for change of her nominee in the LIC and GPF accounts. She alleged ill treatment and misbehaviour as well as mental and physical torture against the respondent/husband. According to her, the respondent/husband neglected to take her to the Doctor for medical checkup at the time of her pregnancy and also did not extend any co-operation in her frail state of health. Instead, the appellant alleged that the respondent used to visit her rented house at Borkhola and demand money from her. She stated that it was due to the mental pressure created by the respondent by demanding money and her workload to be performed single handedly, she suffered bleeding and on medical advice was compelled to undergo abortion of the foetus. She alleged that it was the respondent/husband, who mounted pressure on her to cause abortion of the second pregnancy and, in fact, misbehaved with her and compelled her to leave the matrimonial home on 27.02.2002. She alleged that though on the delivery of the female child on 19.04.2002, due information was given to the respondent/husband, he exhibited indifference as the baby was a girl. The appellant in her written statement expressed her willingness to live with the respondent/husband for the sake of the child.