MANIDIPA BHOWMIK Vs. MIHIR DATTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the wife is filed against the judgment and order dated 27.07.2007 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Udaipur, South Tripura, in the Title Suit (Divorce) 07/2005. The marriage between the parties took place on 06.08.2000 as culmination of a love affair which developed during their study at Agartala. The husband, the respondent herein the serving as an Assistant Teacher in a school located at Amarpur at the time of marriage which was solemnised as per Hindu Rites and Customs at Udaipur in the residence of the wife, the appellant herein. The parties started living together as husband and wife in a joint family of the respondent consisting his widow mother and unmarried younger sister. After some days from the marriage it was noticed that the appellant was reluctant to reside in the ancestral house of the respondent at Amarpur and without any information she used to leave the matrimonial home at this or that pretext. The appellant could not tolerate the mother and younger unmarried sister of the respondent and for a reprieve therefrom the respondent had to send his unmarried younger sister to the house of his brother-in-law at Agartala. Even thereafter, the appellant could not adjust with the old widow mother of the respondent and she used to pick up quarrel with the mother of the respondent without any reasonable cause and on several occasions the appellant left the house of the respondent without any intimation and continued to stay in her parental house at Udaipur for a long spell. On most of the occasions, the respondent along with his elder brother-in-law, namely Sri Kajal Majumder had to assuage the appellant by prolonged persuasion for coming back to the house of the respondent. It has been further alleged in the petition filed under Section 13(1) (ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, hereinafter referred as the 'petition' in short, that on 05.08.2002 when the respondent was on duty in his school, the appellant deserted the respondent without any intimation either to him or to his mother. On coming back from the school when the respondent came to know that the appellant had left the house, he immediately rushed to the parental house of the appellant and requested her to return but the appellant flatly denied. The respondent also took help of the uncles of the appellant, namely Sri Sukhen Bhowmik and Sri Sailen Bhowmik to impress the appellant for returning to the matrimonial home but, all such endeavours as taken by the said uncles as well were frustrated by the appellant and from 05.08.2002 till filing of the petition, the appellant did never enquire about the respondent or his old widow mother. She was showing vehemence whenever any proposal for conciliation was made and thereby she frustrated all such initiatives. On 10.01.2003 the appellant delivered a male child but she did not make any contact with the respondent. Thus the respondent was deprived of even seeing his newly born child. Whenever the respondent tried to contact the appellant over phone, the appellant was not allowed to attend the phone calls or she was not attending the calls. It is alleged in the petition that even the father and younger brother of the appellant insulted him on many occasions. Ultimately, the appellant instituted one proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for maintenance, for herself and for the newly born son.

(2.) The prayer of the appellant was rejected with a finding that since the appellant deserted the respondent without any reasonable cause, she had been disentitled from the maintenance, however, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Udaipur, by the order dated 30.03.2005 made provisions for maintenance of Rs. 1,000/- per month for the newly born son. When the said proceeding under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. was pending, the petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer in the District Institute of Education and Training (DIET), Kunjaban on and from 30.06.2004 and since then the respondent was living at Agartala alone in a rented house. During her examination in the said maintenance proceeding, the appellant deposed that she was no longer interested to live with the respondent even if the mother and unmarried younger sister of the respondent were not allowed to live with them in a rented house. The appellant had been living in her father's house at Udaipur, avoiding and depriving the respondent of the conjugal life. Ultimately, the petition on the ground of cruelty and desertion was instituted by the respondent.

(3.) Having received the notice from the Court of the learned Judge, Family Court at Udaipur in the said suit for dissolution of marriage being Title Suit (Divorce) 07/2005, the respondent, the appellant herein, appeared and filed the written statement by denying all the allegations as levelled against her and stated that she was induced by the respondent and got their marriage registered in the office of the Registrar, Hindu Marriage Act, Agartala, though there was no marriage as per Hindu rites and customs. The appellant further alleged that the said marriage was kept secret but, after long time when the respondent came back on completion of his studies, he refused to marry the appellant. At the instance of the elder sister of the appellant, namely Smti Sudipa Bhowmik, the respondent agreed to marry the appellant on condition that a dowry of Rs. 5 lacs be paid. She further alleged in the written statement that on 22.05.1999, the respondent by a letter revealed that he would be ready for dissolution of marriage if a sum of Rs. 7 lacs were paid to him. She alleged in the written statement further that at the instigation of the old mother, sister and brother-in-law, the respondent started torturing the appellant both physically and mentally. The appellant however, did not initially inform about such torture to his father but when she found the torture unbearable, she had to inform her father on 16.02.2001. The father of the appellant under such circumstances shifted her to Udaipur with consent of the respondent but when the respondent came to Udaipur on 29.02.2001 for taking back the appellant, the father of the appellant raised the matter of torture. At the point of time, the respondent misbehaved with her father and left the house posing a threat of adverse consequence. The appellant also contended that one meeting was convened in the house of one Ashotush Sarkar, who happened to be a close acquaintance of the appellant's family on 03.06.2001. In that meeting, the respondent apologised to the father of the appellant. The appellant further stated in her written statement that she was again subjected to torture on 12.09.2001 when the respondent's mother and sister attempted to kill her by lassoing a saree around her neck. It was also alleged that the respondent and his relatives tried to cause abortion of her foetus. In such situation she was compelled to leave the house of the respondent on 05.08.2002 and since then she has been living in her father's house at Udaipur. The appellant further stated that she gave birth of a male child on 10.01.2003 at Agartala but alleged that even after sending information, the respondent did not turn up. However, she admitted that none the less she approached this Court against the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate denying her maintenance, the same was not interfered with and the order of the learned, South Tripura, Udaipur was maintained with modification that the male child shall get Rs. 1,500/- per month.