MRIDUL SARMA Vs. GITUMONI BHATTACHARJEE
LAWS(GAU)-2018-5-103
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on May 22,2018

Mridul Sarma Appellant
VERSUS
Gitumoni Bhattacharjee Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Ajit Singh, J. - (1.) This appeal is by the husband - Mridul Sarma - against the judgment dated 16.6.2017 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, No.-II, Kamrup (Metro), in F.C.(Civil) Case No. 118/2013, whereby the petition filed by him against his respondent-Gitumoni Bhattacharjee under Section 13(1)(ia)&(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short 'Act') has been dismissed.
(2.) Facts in short are these. Appellant husband and Respondent wife were married on 02.10.2000 and they started their married life in a rented house first, but later shifted to the house of the father of the appellant. Out of their wedlock, a female child, Anuja Sarma, was also born on 10.1.2002. According to the appellant, initially their married life was happy but in the month of April, 2001, the respondent deserted him. He is a jobless person and used to stay in the house of his father along with other family members including three paternal aunts, whereas the respondent used to work in a school. When the respondent deserted him without any cause and started living in her parental home, the appellant out of love and affection for the daughter went to stay in the parental house of the respondent and he continued to stay there off and on till the month of October, 2005. One day in the month of October, 2005, the respondent abused him without any rhyme or reason, and hence he had to leave the company of the respondent. According to the appellant, respondent stopped wearing sindur at the instigation of her mother and she expressed her desire not to live with the appellant in spite of all his efforts, and hence, when all his attempts to bring her back failed, he filed the petition seeking a decree of divorce.
(3.) The respondent contested the suit by filing written statement stating inter-alia that the appellant is a jobless person and she and the appellant had to depend solely on the income of her father-in-law, who was an employee in a bank. Besides, the appellant was drunkard and used to treat her in inappropriate manner. Besides, the family members of the appellant also did not treat her well and never restrained the appellant from consuming alcohol and in one occasion, one unmarried sister of the appellant threw one hot cup of tea on her. Therefore, she along with their daughter had to leave the company of the appellant and stay with her father. The appellant also came to her parental house, but later he left her alone. He was a drunkard and he also instigated her brother to drink and therefore, she had to stop him from coming to her father's house and stop all connections with him. She categorically denied that she refused to wear the sindur and alleged that the same is a concocted allegation against her by the appellant. She admitted that the father and uncle of the appellant visited the house of her father once to discuss of the marriage and asked the respondent to give divorce. According to her, the appellant never tried to contact her and never wished their minor child, even in her birthdays or other festivals. According to the respondent, she tried to stay with her in-laws, but she was misbehaved and tortured to such an extent that she was forced to leave her matrimonial home and as such her desertion was not willful and hence she prayed for dismissal of the suit.;


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