RITA DEY Vs. NIKUNJ DEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is arising out of judgment and order passed by the then learned Additional District Judge, 5th, Dhanbad in Title (Mat.) Suit No. 4 of 1986, whereby and whereunder the learned Court below decreed the suit and passed the order of dissolution of marriage.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to this appeal that the plaintiff/respondent is an employee of Railway working as Cleaner and posted at Dhanbad and he had married with the appellant, Smt. Rita Dey on 26-4-1982 according to the Hindu rites and customs and after marriage the respondent/plaintiff brought the wife-appellant at his residence and they started living as husband and wife. Some time in July 1982 during the pregnancy period the brother of the appellant came along with his friends and sought for Bidai and accordingly the respondent sent the appellant to her father's place and thereafter she has been residing there. A female child was born on 23-1-1983. The respondent/plaintiff used to visit the house of the appellant and to see his daughter and also tried to bring the appellant several times but the appellant and her brothers did not allow her to go back to her Sasural. They were trying to persuade the respondent to stay at the appellant's house as Ghar Jamai leaving his own parents which was not acceptable to the respondent/plaintiff. On 5-8-1983, the plaintiff/respondent went to the house of appellant to take her and daughter to his own house but she refused to come back. It is further claimed that while the appellant with his daughter in lap taking them from her parents house, the father-in-law of the plaintiff and others forcibly restrained the plaintiff/respondent from taking the appellant and then the plaintiff proceeded, as a result of which he was assaulted. After some time on the same way, the brother-in-law of the plaintiff namely Badal Paul along with some others came and abused the plaintiff-respondent and his parents. On 10-8-1983 at the intervention of the local police the daughter was given to the appellant. The plaintiff also filed a petition before the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad on 6-8-1983 and the plaintiff requested to save him from the high handedness of his father-in-law and others. The appellant also filed a case under Section 125 Cr. P.C. for maintenance and the said case is still pending for final order. The plaintiff-respondent was all along ready and willing to keep the respondent back to his house but the appellant has declined to stay and live with the plaintiff/respondent and the appellant has voluntarily deserted the plaintiff for more than two years and she has finally declined to stay and live with the plaintiff as a result of which the suit for divorce was filed.

(3.) The wife/appellant also filed written statement claiming therein that during marriage the mother and brother of the appellant had to give huge dowry to the plaintiff/respondent but even then the plaintiff is insisting for dowry. It is further claimed that the appellant's mother and elder brother were compelled to bare the expenses not only the clothes but even day to day expenses. It is further alleged that the appellant was often assaulted by the plaintiff and there was a demand of a sum of Rs. 7,000.00 by way of further loan by the plaintiff for further construction of the residential house and due to which the appellant was subjected to torture and due to conduct and behaviour of the plaintiff and his family members forced the appellant to leave her matrimonial house along with her elder brother on 13-7-1982. The plaintiff and his parents avoided to take the appellant to her matrimonial home as well as the plaintiff and his parents did not spend a single farthing towards the maintenance of the baby child. The plaintiff never went to the house of appellant to bring back her and her daughter. On 5-8-1983 at about 9 a.m. the plaintiff, all of a sudden came to the parents house of the appellant and forcibly snatched and took away the child from the lap of appellant despite serious protest. The plaintiff along with his associates gave out violent threats to assault the appellant and her family members for which the elder brother of the appellant and also initiated a proceeding under Section 107, Cr. P.C. against the plaintiff and the plaintiff has never been willing to take back the appellant and her child to his house and the allegation of desertion on the part of the appellant is false and not correct and as such the suit is fit to be dismissed.