DIPALI DAS Vs. GORA CHAND DAS
LAWS(CAL)-1983-2-22
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on February 10,1983

DIPALI DAS Appellant
VERSUS
GORA CHAND DAS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS appeal at the instance of the husband arises out of a Matrimonial suit filed by the husband for judicial separation under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which was amended praying for divorce after the amendment of the marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1977. In the petition filed the only ground alleged by the petitioner/husband as against the wife is cruelty.
(2.) THE broad fact leading to the unfortunate suit is that the parties were married according to Hindu rites on the 11th May, 1967. On 10th of November, 1967, the wife allegedly left the matrimonial home with her parents. A daughter was born to her on 30th June, 1968. On 9th July, 1973, the present suit was filed after withdrawing the earlier suit being Suit No. 16 of 1973, filed by the husband as against the wife in the same court with the leave to file a fresh suit. After a protracted hearing of the matter ultimately by a judgment dated 16th April, 1979, the husband's petition for divorce was rejected.
(3.) BEING aggrieved by the said judgment the husband presented the present appeal on 15th of June, 1979. Before we deal with the case in hand, at the outset when the parties were present in court we asked both the parties whether there is any chance for reconciliation even at this stage. While the wife agreed to go back to the husband, the husband definitely through his Advocate stated he is not willing to take back his wife In the longish petition for divorce it was stated marriage between the petitioner/husband and the respondent wife was a negotiated one. Then after two months after the marriage the petitioner/ husband who is a member of a joint family comprising of his old father, elder brother uncle, aunt and their children was living at premises No. 8, Sashi Bhusan Neogi Garden lane and also in the adjoining house. But the respondent/wife after about two months of the marriage was pestering the husband for living apart from the joint family. The petitioner/husband alleged that the wife was always suspicious of the husband and it was stated in that petition that it was alleged by the wife that the petitioner/husband had association with opposite sex. She was also pestering the petitioner/husband persistently as the petitioner, it is alleged, used to come back home after his work at late hours. It is alleged further that this nagging character of the respondent/wife reached such a pass that even when the petitioner/husband retired to bed-room the respondent Wife would quarrel with the petitioner/husband with violent outburst of temper. This was, it: is alleged, uncalled for and unreasonable conduct and behaviour of the respondent/ wife so soon after his marriage not only embarrassed the petitioner/husband with the other members of the family but started to affects the peace of mind, work in office and the state of his health due to lack of sleep at night. It is further alleged that the respondent/wife went to the police and made a diary against the petitioner/ husband, went to the office of the husband and raised hue and cry in the office and also went to the Superintendent of Police and complained against the petitioner/husband. it is alleged further that she went to the office of the petitioner/husband and com plained to the higher authorities for redress of the alleged grievance of the petitioner's wife. It is further alleged that the respondent/wife displayed complete lack of under standing of the position of the petitioner demanding to stay alone outside the joint family. It is stated further that the petitioners wife was taken to the petitioner's father-in-law's place by her father at the instance of the relations of the petitioner and she along with her father left the premises in the month of October, 1967. Thereafter all on a sudden on 6th November, 1967, when the petitioner/husband was not at home, the respondent turned up at the matrimonial home at Baranagar escorted by her elder brother. When asked by the petitioner's elder brother for her sudden return so late at night it is alleged, the respondent/wife lost her temper without any provocation and started quarrelling bitterly to the embarrassment of all including the petitioner's elder brother who being unable to control her left. Be that as it may thereafter the petitioner's father wrote a letter to the respondent's father explaining the situation and asked the respondent's father to take his daughter away for sometime. Thereafter, on 30th June, 1968, the respondent gave birth to a female child named ruma. It is alleged that the news of the child's birth was not conveyed to the petitioner/husband by the respondent/wife or her parents. In fine it appears that the case for cruelty as made out in the petition is one that the respondent/wife was not agreeable to continue to live in the joint family as she was the nagging wife, namely (a) she allegedly state that the petitioner/ husband had affairs with other ladies (b)she reported falsely to the police (c) she made rows in the office of the petitioner and (d) wrote letter to the officer of the petitioner/husband making allegations therein against the petitioner/husband.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.