SANJAY CHOUDHARY @ SANJAY JAISWAL SON OF MAHENDRA PRASAD @ JAISWAL @ MAHENDRA CHOUDHARY R/O TARAPUR (RAJGURU), P.S. TARAPUR, DISTRICT MUNGER Vs. ANJALI DEVI WIFE OF SANJAY CHOUDHARY @ SANJAY JAISWAL, D/O RAM PRASAD CHOUDHARY R/O RAJGURU TARAPUR, P.S. TARAPUR, DISTRICT MUNGER, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT VILLAGE PUPARI, P.S. PUPARI, DISTRICT MUNGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant miscellaneous appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 6.8.2014 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger in Matrimonial Case No. 1030 of 2013/177 of 2012 in the matter of Sanjay Chaudhary @ Sanjay Jaiswal Vs. Anjali Devi whereby and where under the suit was dismissed ex-parte. The petitioner is the appellant and the opposite party is the respondent herein.

(2.) The appellant-petitioner had filed the matrimonial case before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger under Sec. 13 of Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent-opposite party by decree of divorce.

(3.) Briefly stated, the case of the appellant was that he was married with the respondent on 22.6.1998 at village Pupari and subsequent to marriage the opposite party joined the matrimonial home of the petitioner at Raj Guru Tarapur, District Munger. Out of the wedlock a baby girl was born on 21.2.2002 but since the beginning of 2003 the behaviour of respondent changed and she started misbehaving and abusing the petitioner and his family members as a result of which the petitioner's brother started living separately in a rented house, petitioner also somehow managed a rented house to live along with the respondent and minor daughter. Father and brother of respondent came to Tarapur and suddenly the respondent with all her belongings including ornaments and the daughter left the house of the petitioner on 30.6.2003 and since thereafter, whenever the petitioner went to meet her he was not allowed by the respondent and her relatives and even he was not allowed to enter the house of the respondent and was abused and threatened to be killed. The respondent filed Criminal case bearing No. 198C of 2003 on 4th July, 2003 under Sec. 498A, Penal Code against all the family members of the petitioner. She also filed Misc. Case No. 21 of 2003 for maintenance and Misc. Case No. 25 of 2005 for interim maintenance. Again she filed Complaint Case No. 85C of 2005 against same set of accused and cognizance in this case was also taken under Sec. 498A of the Indian Penal Code and that Complaint Case 85C of 2005 was quashed by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 17101 of 2009 and in Complaint Case No. 198C of 2003 compromise was filed on 22.1.2005 but thereafter, the respondent was not prepared to accompany the petitioner because she was pregnant and gave birth to a male child after seven months of compromise and since 30.6.2003 respondent never lived with the appellant and this goes to show that the respondent is living in adultery. The respondent has deserted for more than two years since 30.6.2003 and further denial of sex and causing mental and physical agony to the petitioner amounts to cruelty. On notice, respondent appeared. However, at the stage of reconciliation she stopped attending the case hence, the case proceeded ex-parte. The petitioner examined two witnesses. PW 1 is the petitioner himself and PW 2 Uma Shankar Jaiswal. Besides the oral evidence the petitioner also exhibited following documents: