NIRMAL PAUL Vs. NAMITA PAUL
HIGH COURT TRIPURA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The present appeal is filed by the appellant husband being aggrieved and dissatisfied with judgment dated 30.04.2015 passed by the Family Court, Agartala in case No. TS (Divorce) 332 of 2009 rejecting his petition for divorce.
(2.) The facts in a nutshell are that appellant Nirmal Paul and respondent Smt. Namita Paul entered into matrimonial alliance as per Hindu rites and rituals at Agartala on 30th Baisakha, 1408 B.S corresponding to 14th May, 2001. It is the case of the appellant that a month after marriage, his wife started misbehaving with him. At that time the appellant lived in a common mess with his old parents, three brothers and their families which was not liked by his respondent wife. She demanded a separate mess and told her appellant husband that it was not possible on her part to prepare food for every member of the extended family. Her conduct and behavior to the appellant and his family members was very indignant and rude. She also used to visit her parents frequently and stay at her parental home for months together. However, within few months of marriage, she conceived and a daughter was born to them. 6 (six) months after the birth of her daughter, the respondent got a government job as teacher in an anganwadi centre at Udaipur. After getting her job she left the company of her appellant husband on 04.08.2005 and started living with her parents. The appellant visited his wife and daughter at her parental home several times to bring them back. But, she wanted her appellant husband to stay with her at her parental home at Udaipur. He then filed a suit in the Family Court, Agartala seeking restitution of conjugal rights which was registered as TS (RCR) 55 of 2009 in the Family Court and after hearing the parties, the Family Court decided the suit by directing the spouses to meet each other once in a week. Though the appellant met his wife and daughter at her parental home at Udaipur several times in terms of the said order of the Family Court but his respondent wife never came to Agartala to meet him. Rather, she implicated the appellant, his mother, younger brother and the husband of his sister in a case under section 498A IPC. Thereafter, the appellant filed the said petition under section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Family Court at Agartala for divorce on the ground of desertion.
(3.) In reply to the allegations of her husband, respondent wife filed written objection. She denied every allegation of her husband and claimed that all those allegations were frivolous, vexatious and false. According to her, after marriage she was treated with extreme cruelty by her husband and in-laws. It was alleged by her that on 3rd August, 2005 her appellant husband and in-laws physically assaulted her and on the following day they ousted her from her matrimonial home. She was then sheltered by her brother from where she lodged a case under section 498A IPC against her husband and in-laws. Her case was registered in court as CR 493 of 2006 and after trial her appellant husband was found guilty. He was convicted and sentenced for imprisonment for 3 (three) years by the trial court. Her appellant husband challenged the judgment in appeal. She also stated in her reply that right from the beginning of her marriage she received humiliating treatment from her husband and in-laws. Though her parents gave valuables like jewellery, furniture, utensils and cash during her marriage, her appellant husband demanded more cash after marriage. Since her parents were unable to fulfil his demand, she was subjected to harassment at her matrimonial home. The neighbours noticed the incidents of cruelty meted out to her by her husband and in-laws. According to her, she never deserted her husband. Rather her appellant husband drove her out of her matrimonial home after committing physical assault on her on 04.08.2005. She, therefore, wanted dismissal of the petition of her husband.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.