J.Banerjee, J. - (1.) The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of dismissal dated 23.3.91 passed by the Additional District Judge, 11th Court, Alipore in Mat. Suit No.72/86.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts and circumstances leading to filing of the instant appeal are as follows: The petitioner Dipak Kumar Sarkar filed an application mainly praying for a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent, Sima Sarkar. In the original petition, the petitioner alleged that the marriage between the parties was solemnized according to Hindu rites at Sodepur within P.S. Khardah in the District of 24- Parganas (at present North 24-Parganas) in the father's house of respondent on 6th of December, 1976. The marriage between the parties was a negotiated one. It was alleged there that the parties lived together as husband and wife till the end of January, 1984 and out of the wedlock a female and a male children were born. At the time of filing the petition the age of the female child was 5 years and that of the male child was 9 months. It was further alleged that after their marriage, the parties started living at L.I.G. Housing Estate situated in Belgachia Road. It was further alleged that upto the end of January, 1984 both the husband and wife continued to live in the same flat. Thereafter, they were living separately, cooking their meals separately and since February, 1984 there was no marital relations between the parties, though they continued to live in the same flat and this was culmination of extreme cruel treatment both physical and mental by the respondent/wife towards her husband in the following manner: (i) The respondent/wife failed to discharge her marital obligation towards the petitioner causing deterioration of the mental and physical condition of the petitioner. (ii) The respondent/wife was of dominating nature and she wanted to dominate everybody including the petitioner. Prior to February, 1984, the respondent used to keep the entire monthly salary of the petitioner in her custody and did not pay him even the pocket expenses. (iii) The respondent was a quarrelsome woman who used to pick up quarrel with the petitioner and others without any cause and used to abuse the petitioner in filthy language. The wife became more furious since February 1984, when she became pregnant with the male child. She used to create scene in the flat for which it was almost impossible for the petitioner to live in the said flat. The respondent refused to cook food for the petitioner and on many occasions he had to go to his place of work without taking his meal. (iv) The respondent used to threaten that she would commit suicide and in this way would teach the petitioner a lesson. (v) The respondent preferred to stay in her parents' place in most of the time without caring to take consent of the petitioner.
(3.) In connection with the suit, the respondent/wife filed a written statement denying the material allegations raised in the petition. The respondent specifically alleged in her written statement that from her early childhood she was a girl of soft and submissive nature and after her marriage she came to reside with her husband as a very loving and loyal bride. She was always attentive and careful to his minimum needs and she never opened her mouth even to protest against her husband, even when he was palpably wrong. The respondent was utterly shocked when she came to learn that her husband had a clandestine love affair with her own younger sister Kabita. The petitioner even threatened to marry the said Kabita after obtaining divorce from the respondent. The father of the respondent asked her youngest sister Kabita to shun the company of the petitioner. One of the friends of the father of the respondent Sunil Chowdhury tried to intervene in the matter but in his presence the petitioner openly declared that he was bent upon marrying Kabita and respondent should give her consent for this. The respondent has disclosed that she is always ready and willing to live with her husband and children but she expects that her husband who is on the wrong side of forty (at the time of filing written statement) should live a temperate life.;