AKALANKA BHANDARI Vs. ARUNA BHANDARI
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE hearing of this appeal was concluded on 19. 5. 1970. At the conclusion of the hearing we expressed our desire to effect a reconciliation if that was possible and we also requested both the husband and the wife to be present in Court on a date that may be suitable to them. On the suggestion of the parties this date was fixed for the presence of the husband and the wife in Court and also for delivery of judgment, in case no settlement was arrived at. Both the husband and the wife appeared in court today and we made attempts to effect reconciliation between the parties but that has failed. After that the learned Advocates made further sumissions on the points of law and also on facts.
(2.) THIS is an appeal by the husband against the judgment and decree dismissing his application for restitution of conjugal rights against the wife. The marriage took place on August 6, 1962, according to Hindu rites. After marriage, according to the husband, the couple lived for about a month at mysore; the husband, a doctor, was serving there in the railways. She was brought to her father's place at Lake town but was unwilling to return to mysore. She was taken back to Mysore on persuasion against her wish and soon after her father brought back to his residence at Lake Town in the suburb of Calcutta. The husband in his agony had to resign and came back to the wife at Lake Town to persuade her to live with him in a peaceful matrimonial home. He secured a job at garbeta and took the wife there but even so her stay there was short and she left for her father's place without excuse. Since June 13, 1963 to June 11, 1967, she lived at her father's place away from the husband, who visited her several times to persuade her to live with him but all was in vain. On december 19, 1963, a son was born to her and subsequently a daughter was born to her but all about her was kept secret from the husband. Early in 1967, at the intervention of friends, she came back to the husband's place and stayed there upto December 30, 1967, when she again withdrew from the society of the husband without any excuse. In spite of his attempts she refused to come back. The husband in the said circumstances prayed for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights against the wife.
(3.) THE petition was opposed by the wife who denied the several allegations made in the petition. Her material allegations were that due to the husband's short temper, violent and ill treatment to her, his growing suspicion about her character, she was forced to leave her husband. The husband taunted her lack of beauty and character causing distress in her mind and she was unable to live with him for fear of permanent injury to her and her children.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.