NIRMAL NATH Vs. VINEETA DOWARAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this matrimonial appeal, under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Appellant Dr. Nirmal Nath (husband), challenged the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2010 (decree signed on 03.01.2011) passed by learned District Judge, Tinsukia in Title Suit (matrimonial) No. 27 of 2008. By the impugned judgment and decree, learned District Judge directed dissolution of the Hindu marriage solemnized between the appellant and the respondent on 20.06.1999 as per Hindu rites and customs. Heard learned counsel, Mr. K. Agarwal for the appellant and learned counsel, Mr. D.R. Gogoi for the respondent.

(2.) The respondent (wife) set the law in motion presenting a petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act seeking dissolution of the marriage between her and her husband alleging interalia that their marriage was solemnized on 20.06.1999 as per Hindu rites and social customs in her parental house at Gela Pukhuri road, Tinsukia, on negotiation with the consent of the parents of both side. Before marriage, the respondent was working as a Lecturer in English, in a Govt. College, Kamki, Arunachal Pradesh and the appellant (husband) was working as a Veterinary doctor and was posted at Changlang, Arunachal Pradesh. After marriage, they lived and cohabited as husband and wife in the place of their posting after taking leave or on convenient holidays. The respondent thereafter got herself transferred to a College at Changlang, 15 KM away from Changlang town with a view to live with her husband. She alleged that though her husband had a vehicle, he was reluctant to provide the vehicle for her way to college and back and therefore, she had to arrange a quarter in the college campus. However, the matrimonial life continued and a female child Ritika was born to them on 10.09.2002. She alleged that her husband did not make any arrangement for their stay together with the newly born daughter and also did not take any care of her and the daughter and left them alone in the government quarter. With a view to live together in the year 2005, she got herself transferred to a govt. college at Deomali of Tirup District and her husband also made a prayer for such transfer but ultimately her husband through his department did not take step for such transfer. It is alleged by the respondent that during their conjugal life, her husband used to quarrel with her on petty issues and would hurl abusive words to her and thereby inflict torture on her both mentally and physically. He also used to abuse her with slang language uttering the name of her parents and whenever she would raise protest, her husband would get excited and would physically assault her. On many occasions she was subjected to cruelty both mentally and physically. She also alleged that her husband through cell phone scolded her in filthy and slang language and also used to send her SMS with abusive words in filthy language. On some occasions, her husband, while went to live with her in her government quarter, used to unnecessarily create disturbance and quarrel with her but she would tolerate it considering her social status and prestige in the locality. On 05.11.2006, her husband went to her govt. quarter at Deomali and scolded her with slang language and brought out various valuable articles such as fridge, TV, blankets, utensils etc. and when she objected to such activity, she was physically assaulted. In the worst situation, police was informed and her husband, before the police, told that he snapped off relations with her and thereafter taken away all articles. After 05.11.2006 her husband never resided with her and he was also not taking care of their minor daughter. For maintaining their daughter, she has been spending Rs. 6000/- and she demanded half of the expenditure from her husband. She prayed for a decree of divorce.

(3.) The appellant contested the suit by filing written statement denying the allegations made in the petition and interalia stated that prior to their marriage they have developed a good relation and occasionally they used to meet one another on their way to working place and ultimately they decided to enter into a wedlock. Thereafter both of them informed their parents and with the consent of their respective parents they performed their marriage on 20.06.1999. After the marriage, they led their conjugal relation peacefully and out of their wedlock a girl child was born and both of them gave her name as Ritika Nath and accordingly on 08.11.2002 a Birth Certificate was issued from Changlang vide Registration No. CLG-501/02. At the time of marriage, the respondent was working on Adhoc basis as she was only a post graduate. For the purpose of permanent appointment of the respondent a Ph.D. degree was essential as such the appellant extended all sorts of co-operation to the respondent, such as giving her all opportunity for study, visiting Capital Library in Itanagar, collecting material for preparing thesis, field works, and many a times visited Naharlagan for the said purpose and ultimately she got the Ph.D. and got her permanent appointment. But after having Ph.D degree, he observed that the respondent's mother started interfering in their marital relation and off and on she used to insist the respondent to come to her house at Deomali and to stay there. It is further alleged that as and when the Appellant visited the house of his in-laws to see his child and wife, the mother of the respondent misbehaved with him and thereby many a times humiliated him. In the meantime, though both of them tried to get their transfer at Deomali, the respondent succeeded to get her transfer at Deomali, but the appellant's transfer application was not considered for want of any vacancy at Deomali in the veterinary department. Accordingly, the respondent shifted to Deomali and the appellant used to visit and stay together as and when he got the opportunity in weekly holidays and even after taking leave. But as and when he visited the respondent at Deomali, her mother came there and humiliated him on this or that pretext even in presence of the respondent, but the respondent did never raise protest to her mother. It is further stated that at the time of admission of Ritika in the school the respondent without the consent of the appellant got her surname changed and gave as Ritika Dowarah Nath and thereby ignored the identity of her father, i.e. the appellant.