DINESH MANDAL Vs. CHAITALI MAJUMDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed under Sec. 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, impugning the judgment dtd. 18/4/2017 passed by Ld. Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Katihar, in Matrimonial Case (Divorce) No. 560 of 2012, whereby the petition filed under Sec. 13(1)(i), praying for decree of divorce, has been dismissed ex parte.

(2.) The case of the Appellant/Plaintiff as per the pleadings is that he was married with the Respondent in the year 1980 as per Hindu Rites and Customs and out of the wedlock, two children were born, one is son, Devashis Mandal, who is aged about 27 years and the second is daughter Chandrani Mandal, who is aged about 25 years. It is further averred that after solemnization of the marriage, both the parties began to lead happy and prosperous conjugal life. But, in 1997, the Defendant/Respondent left the company of the Appellant/Plaintiff and began to live in a hospital quarter. The Plaintiff/Appellant left no stone unturned to mend the way of the Defendant/Respondent but of no avail. It is further averred that the Defendant/Respondent filed a Complaint Case No. 1249 of 2000, in the Court of Ld. C.J.M., alleging torture and harassment and this complaint is still pending and the marriage bond between the parties has completely broken down. It is further averred that the Plaintiff/Appellant made several attempts to repair the matrimonial bond but the Defendant/Respondent is negating the company of the Appellant. It is further averred that the conduct and circumstances created by the Defendant/Respondent is humiliating and causing mental cruelty because she had roped the Appellant in false criminal case due to which the life of the Plaintiff/Appellant has become miserable and he is feeling humiliated in both private and public life. And hence, the Plaintiff/Appellant is not in a position to live with the Defendant/Respondent. It is further informed that earlier a Matrimonial Case No. 30 of 2000, was filed by the Plaintiff/Appellant in the Court of Ld. District and Sessions Judge, Katihar, in which the Defendant/Respondent had appeared and filed her written statement. Reconciliation proceedings was also conducted. However, the Defendant/Respondent had completely refused to go with the Appellant to lead a conjugal life. It is further averred that the said matrimonial case/suit could not be contested by the Plaintiff/Appellant and hence, that case was dismissed due to lack of proper pairvi and the suit could not attain finality. It is further averred that his marriage has irretrievably broken down and there is no emotional substratum in the marriage. The matrimonial bond is beyond repair and the marriage is only for the sake of name. It is further averred that the Defendant/Respondent has been living separately from the company of the Plaintiff/Appellant for about 15 years and hence, he is claiming that the Plaintiff/Appellant is entitled to Decree of Divorce dissolving the marriage between the parties.

(3.) On notice, the Defendant did not appear. Hence, she was proceeded ex parte. During the ex parte trial, the following three witnesses were examined on behalf of the Plaintiff/Appellant :