SIMA PALIT Vs. PRADIP KUMAR PALIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Mr D Guha the learned counsel for the appellant and Mr D Chakraborty the learned counsel for the respondents The short point which fails for consideration in this appeal is whether the decree of divorce passed by the learned Additional District Judge West Tripura Agartala on the ground of irretrlev able breakdown of marriage even after holding that the allegations of cruelty and desertion made by the respondent No. 1 against his wife were not established, is sustainable in law.

(2.) The respondent No. 1 herein filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of his marriage with the appellant. The case of the respondent No. 1 is that his marriage with the appellant was solemnized according to Hindu religious rites on 22-1-1991. After the marriage, they started living together as husband and wife for a period of 10 days at his residence. The respondent No. 1, who was serving as Constable in the Border Security Force, left his house for joining his place of posting at Manipur leaving her under the care of his elder brother. The respondent No. 1 was then transferred to Meghalaya in the month of April. 1991. On expressing her reluctance to live with the family of his elder brother on the ground of maltreatment, the respondent No. 1 took her to his place of posting at Shillong where they lived together for a period of 8 months. During this period, the appellant conceived a child whereupon the respondent No. 1 brought her to village Goutamnagar and kept her there under the care of his elder brother where she gave birth to a male child. When the respondent No. 1 returned to his village in 1993 and requested the appellant to join him at his place of posting, she refused to accompany him. It is alleged by the respondent No. 1 that in the month of January, 1993, he got information from his elder brother, his relatives and neighbours that the appellant had developed an illicit relationship with the respondent No. 2, namely Sri Ajoy Roy, thereby making him alert and keeping her at constant vigil. It is further alleged by the respondent No. 1 that one day, on entering into his house from outside, he heard the voice of the respondent No. 2 inside his house, which changed his mind to enter into his house and kept close watch at his house from audible and visible distance and that from his observation he saw the respondent No. 2 about to depart when the appellant kissed him. The respondent No. 1 thereafter questioned the appellant about the incident but she could not give any satisfactory reply. It is the allegation of the respondent No. 2 that in the year 1994 when he returned from Kashmir on leave, he got information from his elder brother and sister-in- law that his wife was pregnant due to her affair with somebody else and that during his absence, she terminated her pregnancy at the instance of her mother. On being asked, the appellant told the respondent No. 1 that she had been suffering from abdominal pain and had to consult a doctor, who told her that a Gall-bladder stone was detected. According to the respondent No. 1, on his inquiry, no operation was done for removal of the Gall-bladder stone. The respondent No. 1 further alleged that in the month of November, 1994, when he visited his house again on leave, he found some of his belongings including Television set shifted to the house of the respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 1 also came to learn from his elder brother that his wife was enjoying with, and entertaining at the house of the respondent No. 2. The elder brother of the respondent No. 1 thereupon convened a meeting on 8-12-1994 in which the appellant and other villagers were present and that in that meeting the appellant was ad vised to rectify herself. The further allegation of the respondent No. 1 is that his wife used to spend a part of the day at the house of the respondent No. 2 as and when he was temporarily absent. According to the respondent No. 1, since the appellant was leading an immoral life, he filed the petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce.

(3.) The appellant contested the suit by filing her written statement, wherein she denied all the allegations of the respondents No. 1. She also claimed that the husband- respondent No. 1 was making false and frivolous allegations for the purpose of filing the petition for dissolution of marriage. It was contended by the appellant that the grounds for dissolution of marriage urged by the respondent No. 1 was not tenable in law on the facts and circumstances of the case and thus prayed for dismissal of the suit.