ARCHANA DAS Vs. GAUTOM GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this matrimonial appeal, the wife who is the respondent in FC (Civil) Suit No. 43/2008 and the petitioner in FC (Civil) Suit No. 228/2008 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Kamrup, Guwahati has assailed the legality and validity of the judgment and decree dated 13.02.2012 and 16.02.2012 respectively passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Kamrup, Guwahati whereby and whereunder the learned Trial Judge dissolved the marriage between the spouses by decree of divorce filed by the petitioner husband in FC(Civil) Suit No. 43/2008 but refused to pass the decree for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the appellant herein and petitioner in FC(Civil) Suit No. 228/2008. Heard Ms. M.D. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the appellant wife. Also heard Mr. A.K. Bhuyan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent husband.

(2.) The brief facts in FC (Civil) Suit No. 43/2008 filed by the husband against the wife seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce whereas in FC (Civil) Suit No. 228/2008 filed by the wife against the husband seeking a decree for restitution of conjugal rights are summarized hereinbelow:

(3.) The acts complained of in FC (Civil) Suit No. 228 of 2008 by the petitioner wife whereby she sought for a decree for restitution of her conjugal rights is that the petitioner is an Operation Officer in IOC and she was in deep love with the respondent husband who is also an employee of IOC. They had sexual intercourse on several occasions and thereby she lost her chastity. After about six years of love they united with the bond of marriage at Sukreswar Temple in the month of January, 2007 as per Hindu rites and rituals. But after 8/9 months of marriage, the mother-in-law, uncle-in-law and two sisters-in-law including the respondent treated her inhumanly by adopting negligent attitude; even then she did not raise any objection. Her further pleaded fact is that she belongs to a respectable Assamese family whereas the husband hails from a Bengali family. The petitioner loved the respondent so much that there was no area of disagreement between them. But the respondent gradually started to misbehave with her in trifling matters. However, the petitioner tolerated all such tortures of the respondents including in-laws considering her married life. On the other hand the respondent at the instigation of his family members instituted a divorce case being F.C. (Civil) suit No. 43/2008 with some false allegations though they lived together as husband and wife till filing of the divorce case. The petitioner never disrespected the respondent prior to her marriage and even after the marriage including all his family members and it is the respondent who willfully deserted her by taking transfer to Nagaon without any prior consultation with the petitioner depriving her due conjugal rights and hence she prayed for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.