SRIKANT MALLICK Vs. SUKLA (ROY) MALLICK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. A. No. 900 of 2017

(2.) The appellant-husband is aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 8th of September, 2016, passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad, in Title Matrimonial Suit No. 27 of 2013, whereby the suit, filed by the appellant-husband for a decree of divorce on the ground that the respondent-wife had not obeyed the decree of restitution of conjugal rights, passed against her, has been dismissed by the Court below.

(3.) According to the appellant's case, the marriage between the parties had solemnized at Sitarampur in the State of West Bengal, on 11.2.1992, according to Hindu rites and customs. Thereafter both the parties were living together as husband and wife at Dhanbad, and they were blessed with a female child on 1.1.2000. It is alleged that after the birth of the child, there was change in the conduct and behavior of defendant-wife and on being asked, she did not assign any reason for change in her behavior, she used to remain quiet, to refuse household work and she withdrew herself from the society of her husband. It is also stated that ultimately on 17.7.2000, the defendant-wife without any knowledge and consent of her husband, left the matrimonial home with her belongings. The plaintiff appellant also went to bring her from her parents place, but they refused to send the defendant-wife with the plaintiff. This compelled the appellant to file an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, being T.M.S. No. 170 of 2000 in the Court below, which was contested by the respondent-wife, but finally decree was passed in favour of the husband on 19.8.2002, whereby the defendant-wife was directed to stay with the plaintiff and discharge her marital obligations as wife. It is also stated that during the pendency of T.M.S. No. 170 of 2000 in the Court below, the defendant-wife had also filed a Misc. Case No. 66 of 2001, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Asansol, in West Bengal, under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., in which, the defendant was allowed the maintenance allowance for herself and her daughter, which was being paid by the plaintiff-appellant at the rate of Rs. 2,500/- per month. Stating that in spite of the judgment in T.M.S. No. 170 of 2000, the defendant willfully and negligently failed to comply the decree of restitution of conjugal rights, the suit for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13(1-A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed in the Court below.