BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA,J. - (1.) THIS first appeal is at the instance of a husband in a suit for divorce filed on the grounds of desertion and cruelty and is directed against the judgment and decree dated March 31, 2004 passed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Barasat, Dist - North 24 - Parganas, in Matrimonial Suit No. 37 of 2003 thereby dismissing the said suit with the finding that the husband failed to prove the grounds taken in such proceeding.
(2.) THE appellant before us filed a suit being Matrimonial Suit No. 37 of 2003 in the Court of learned District Judge at Barasat which was subsequently transferred to the aforesaid Fast Track Court and the case made out by the appellant may be summarised thus : a) The parties were married according to Hindu rites and customs on March 5, 1998 and in the said wedlock, a female baby was born on January 9, 1999. b) The marriage was a negotiated one and the parties used to reside in the same locality within Post Office Madhyamgram, P.S. Barasat. c) After marriage the husband noticed that the wife used to behave in unnatural way. She used to sleep till late hours of the day and go out of the matrimonial home frequently without giving any information and without taking any permission from the husband or any member of his family. Sometimes, she used to prepare food for herself and took the same without keeping any food for the husband or other members of the family. The husband tried his best to rectify the wife but in spite of such efforts, he could not mend the behaviour of the wife and the wife created pressure upon the husband for living with her at her father's house as a domesticated son - in - law. When the husband expressed his inability to comply with such demand, the wife became violent and used filthy languages towards the husband and other members of his family. d) The wife refused to cook food and serve meals to the husband and any member of his family and without taking permission used to move out of home at the odd hours of the day and night. Whenever the husband asked about such movement, she became angry and used to assault the husband by throwing household articles. The wife refused to share bed with the husband and told him that she did not like the company of her husband as a result, the husband felt insulted. e) Subsequently, the husband conveyed those facts to the guardian of the respondent but the family members of the respondent, instead of settling the matter amicably, gave indulgence to her to use filthy and abusive languages towards the husband and the member of his family. f) On may 10, 1999 the wife left the matrimonial home and since then had been living separately at her father's house with the minor child on her own will. The husband tried his best to bring her back from her father's house by going personally and by sending his guardian and friends, but on all occasions the respondent refused to come back to her matrimonial home. The husband also had written several letters to the respondent / wife requesting her to come back and also sent legal notice through the learned Advocate but the respondent refused those letters. Hence the suit. The suit was contested by the wife by filing written statement thereby denying the material allegations made in the plaint and the defence of the wife may be summed up thus : a) Due to inhuman torture of the husband and other inmates of the matrimonial home, the wife was compelled to leave the matrimonial home. After a short period after the marriage, the husband and other members of his family demanded Rs. 50,000/- as dowry but as it was not possible for her to pay the said amount, she was subjected to torture both physically and mentally by the husband and his members of the family. b) During her stay in the matrimonial home, the respondent tried her level best to lead a happy conjugal life and also to perform her duties as a wife towards the appellant but the husband did not discharge his duties as a husband towards the wife and had not given food and clothing to the respondent on different occasions as required in the daily life. c) It was the husband who refused to share the bed with the wife and in view of such illegal act, when the wife requested the husband not to behave in such fashion, he became furious and started inhuman torture and ultimately, the respondent was threatened with dire consequences by the husband and other inmates of the matrimonial home. Consequently, the wife was compelled to leave the matrimonial home along with her minor child keeping all her articles in the house of the husband. d) The wife tried to her best to solve the matter amicably with the help of some elite persons of the locality as well as relatives on different occasions but due to arrogant attitude of the husband, the matter could not be amicably settled. The suit was thus liable to be dismissed.
(3.) AT the time of hearing of the suit the husband alone gave evidence while the wife was also the sole witness in opposing the matrimonial proceeding.;