ALKA DUBEY Vs. PARMOD NATH CHOUBEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal under Sec. 19(1) of the Family Court Act, 1984 is directed against the order/judgment dtd. 2/9/2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Palamau at Daltonganj in Original Suit No. 97 of 2018, whereby and whereunder, the petition filed under Sec. 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the petitioner/respondent seeking a decree of divorce against his wife, has been allowed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case leading to filing of the divorce petition by the husband needs to be referred herein as under: The Respondent/Appellant/Opp. Party is the wife of petitioner/respondent and their marriage was solemnized on 19/6/2014 at village Baradhi Gola, Rohtas. After marriage respondent/appellant/opp. party came to her sasural at Sudna, Daltonganj with petitioner/respondent on 21/6/2014 where both the parties spent their conjugal life for a week. Thereafter brother of respondent/appellant/opp. party came to the house of petitioner/respondent on 29/6/2014 and respondent/appellant/opp. party went her Naihar along with him. It is submitted that after two months, Dwiragaman was performed and respondent/appellant/opp. party again came her sasural on 6/9/2014 and stayed for a week. It is stated that during this period respondent/appellant/opp. party continuously pressurized the petitioner/respondent to help her parents financially as such petitioner/respondent had transferred Rs.1,48,500.00 to the account and also given cash Rs.2,46,000.00 to his father-in-law. It is also stated that thereafter the behaviour of respondent/appellant/opp. party was changed and she started pressurizing the petitioner/respondent to visit her Naihar and on her request petitioner/respondent went his sasural with respondent/appellant/opp. party on 20/11/2014 and stayed there for three days and he returned his home alone. It is stated that respondent/appellant/opp. party is living in her Naihar since 2014 without any reasonable cause and respondent/appellant/opp. party had taken away her all ornaments and belongings with her. Petitioner/respondent had made several request to his in-laws and also to respondent/appellant/opp. party to come back and on 13/2/2015, 10/6/2016 and 1/11/2015 he had visited his sasural to bring his wife back but respondent/appellant/opp. party refused to come at Daltonganj. Ultimately petitioner/respondent had filed a petition before Secretary, D.L.S.A Palamau for restitution of his conjugal in which notice was issued to respondent/appellant/opp. party and her parents but they did not appear before D.L.S.A. Both the parties lastly lived together at Daltonganj on 10/11/2014 within the jurisdiction of this court. It is submitted that behaviour of respondent/appellant/opp. party towards the petitioner and his mother was not good and she always abused them. Once respondent/appellant/opp. party has beaten the petitioner/respondent due to which hand of petitioner/respondent got fractured and he was hospitalized at Daltonganj Hospital. Respondent/appellant/opp. party always insisted the petitioner/respondent to live at her parental house whereas petitioner wants to live with his mother. Respondent/appellant/opp. party tortured the petitioner/respondent physically and mentally and levelled false allegation against him. On the basis of above submission, petitioner/respondent filed the case seeking decree of divorce against his wife on the ground of desertion and cruelty.

(3.) The Family Judge had issued notice to the respondent/appellant/opp. party. The notice shown to be received but the respondent/appellant/opp. Party did not appear in the case and as such, vide order dtd. 27/8/2018, the case proceeded ex-parte against the respondent/appellant/opp. Party. Thereafter, the respondent/appellant/opp. Party had appeared on 26/9/2018 and filed her vakalatnama along with a petition praying therein to recall the order dtd. 27/8/2018 for ex-parte proceeding.