MD. SHAHA ALAM Vs. MUSAMMAT FARIDA BEGUM
LAWS(BANG)-1997-4-2
SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH
Decided on April 08,1997

Md. Shaha Alam Appellant
VERSUS
Musammat Farida Begum Respondents

JUDGEMENT

MOHAMMAD ABDUR ROUF ,J. - (1.) This appeal following leave, by the defendant is from the Judgment and Order dated 1-6-95 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court Division making the Rule, issued in Civil Revision No. 1471 of 1994, absolute and setting aside the concurrent Judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge, Comilla dismissing on 29.4.92, Family Appeal No. 1 of 1991, preferred by the plaintiff, and affirming thereby the judgment and decree dated 31.5.90 passed by a learned Assistant Judge of Family Court, Laksham dismissing Family Court Case No. 33 of 1989.
(2.) Respondent, Musammat Farida Begum instituted the aforesaid suit on 12.7.89 stating, inter alia, that she and the defendant used to love each other and accordingly the defendant promised to marry her. But the defendant's parent being not agreeable to their marriage the defendant himself had taken the initiative and married her on 2nd Agrahayan, 1395 B.S. at a dower money of Tk. 1,00,001/- of which 50% was prompt dower. The defendant also promised to pay her Tk. 700/-, including TK. 200/- as pocket money, per month as maintenance. The marriage was solemnized at the house of the plaintiff's father in presence of her witnesses, other relations, and the friends of the defendant. The defendant further promised to register a kabinnama later on. During the first 2 months of marriage they used to live at the house of the plaintiff's father as husband and wife and thereby she conceived. Subsequently the defendant took Tk. 10,000/- from the plaintiff's father as a refundable loan to run his business and thereafter the defendant once again pressed the plaintiff to collect a further sum of Tk. 10,000/- from her father to help him to run his business and the plaintiff expressed her inability in that regard, but she herself gave him her gold ornaments worth Tk. 15,000/- The defendant sold out those ornaments and used the sale proceeds in his business. Thereafter the plaintiff and her parents pressed upon the defendant for registration of a kabinnama and the defendant on 3rd Magh 1395 B.S sent away to his own house leaving the plaintiff at her father's house. Suddenly on 7th June 1989, the defendant came to the house of the plaintiff's father and proposed to get her health examined by a doctor at Payalgacha Health and Family Planning centre. The plaintiff on 8.6.89 along with the defendant went to the said Family Planning Centre, where the defendant pressed her for causing a miscarriage, but she did not agree. She agreed to cause such miscarriage only after registration of a kabinnama. The defendant further proposed to execute a kabinnama upon a white sheet of paper but the plaintiff did not agree to that. The defendant went away from the said Family planning Centre leaving the plaintiff alone there and since thereafter the defendant did not maintain her.
(3.) The plaintiff claimed for a decree for Tk. 50,000/- as prompt dower, Tk. 3,850/- as maintenance for 51/2 months; Tk. 10,000/- taken as loan by the defendant from the plaintiff's father and Tk. 15,000/- the price of her ornaments, i.e., in total Tk. 78,850/- against the plaintiff, as mentioned in schedule 'ka' to the plaint. The defendant contested the suit by filing a written statement denying the alleged marriage itself. The defense case is that the plaintiff is a divorcee and mother of one child and that she is of questionable character. She, her parent and her other relations with a view to black mailing the defendant's parent had been disclosing in the locality an imaginary marriage of the plaintiff with the defendant. The defendant's father on 12.6.89 instituted a defamation case in the Court of Upazila Magistrate, under sections 120B and 500 of the penal Code against the plaintiff, her parent and other relations being C.R. Case No. 71 of 1989. The plaintiff as a counterblast of the said defamation case instituted the aforesaid civil suit by fabricating a false story of marriage.;


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