SUPRATIM DATTA Vs. MOUTUSHI SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the Judgment of the Learned Judge, Family Court, Gangtok in F.C. (Civil) Case No. 62 of 2012 (Reg. No.167/2013) dismissing his petition seeking dissolution of his marriage with the Respondent, the Appellant in this Appeal seeks to assail the said Judgment.

(2.) The germane facts are that the Appellant (hereinafter 'Petitioner') and the Respondent were married in February, 2006 as per Hindu rites and customs and from the wedlock they have a daughter, now aged about seven years. The Appellant avers that the Respondent after their marriage insisted that they shift to either Kolkata or Agartala from Gangtok, his workplace, despite having agreed to live here prior to their marriage. That, after about four months of their marriage, the Respondent accused him of impotency and communicated this to her parents which led the Petitioner to doubt the state of her mental health. She then went to live with his parents at Agartala, where she reiterated this accusation to the Petitioner's parents threatening to file for a divorce. After living away from the Petitioner for about one and a half years, she returned to Gangtok but attempted to ruin the cordial relations between the Petitioner and his relatives by making unfounded allegations of his sister-in-law practicing black magic to harm their daughter. She wrongfully alleged harassment by a friend of the Petitioner's brother who according to her called her constantly on the phone which turned out to be to the contrary. She also made efforts to create a rift between the Petitioner and his aged parents with whom she had indifferent relations by speaking against them and after the birth of their daughter prevented his parents from seeing the child. That, the relations between the Respondent and the parents of the Petitioner became acrimonious due to her misbehaviour added to which she threatened to commit suicide.

(3.) That, in the month of February, 2010 the Petitioner came to learn that the Respondent and her mother were threatening to file a case against the Petitioner and his entire family under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 which was however temporarily resolved between them. She also told malicious lies regarding the character of the Petitioner to his colleagues, one Sunil Kumar Panday (PW-5) and Debranjan Dutta (PW-4) by frequenting their house and informed them that she intended to file a case of Domestic Violence against him. Apart from the above, it was alleged that she created nuisance in his workplace and abused him in filthy language, while on another occasion in a fit of rage, she assaulted him with a teacup and broke household articles.