- (1.) Challenge in the instant appeal is made under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") by the wife questioning the legality and validity of the judgment and decree dated 08.09.2010 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Cachar, Silchar in FC (Civil) No. 33 of 2006 decreeing dissolution of marriage between the spouses under section 13 of the Act filed by the respondent herein (husband). Heard Ms. R. Devi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Ms. B Chowdhury, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
(2.) Case of the respondent as pleaded relating to matrimonial offence committed by the appellant herein (wife) in a nutshell is summarized as follows:-- The marriage between the spouses was solemnized on 19.04.1999 according to Hindu rites and rituals. After the marriage they lived as husband and wife and out of the said wedlock a male child was born named Harshadheer Singha on 12.05.2000. The allegations brought against the appellant was that after the marriage she used to visit her parent's house frequently and stayed there for about 2/3 weeks at a stretch on various causes without taking into consideration the hardships faced by the respondent. After the birth of the child, the appellant went to her parent's house on the plea of her post natal necessities whereof she conveyed her unwillingness to live with the respondent as his wife. However, on persuasion good sense prevailed and she came back to fulfill her marital obligation. It has been further alleged that during January 2001 both the spouse went to attend the marriage of her sister wherefrom she refused to come back and stayed there (her parental house) for one (1) month causing inconvenience to him. She did not come back to the residence of the respondent to celebrate Basanti Puja in spite of request. The allegation would further reveal that when the respondent get fractured injuries in a vehicular accident she did not come back to look after him which culminated a suit for restitution of conjugal rights and during the pendency of the suit, through amicable discussion, the appellant came back to resume conjugal life. Thereafter, the respondent was transferred to Dehradun and both the spouse went to Dehradun, his place of posting, whereof the respondent had undergone gallbladder operation and the appellant instead of looking after him picked up quarrel with him and caused injuries on his person biting with teeth and thereafter, she left Dehradun on 16.10.2005 and conveyed her decision over phone withdrawing herself from the life of the respondent which caused a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the respondent that it would be harmful for him to live with the appellant and conduct of such marital offence would come within the purview of the term cruelty. The husband, therefore, filed a suit being FC (Civil) No. 33 of 2006 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Cachar, Silchar seeking a decree for dissolution of marriage.
(3.) The appellant contested the suit by filing the written statement admitting the marriage but denied the allegations as leveled against her contending inter alia that the respondent-is a womanizer who had married another woman but divorced her and thereafter the respondent married her and is also trying to marry another girl and neglected her and her newly born child due to love affairs with another girl. The respondent had never tried to bring back the appellant and the child to his society and hence, prayed for dismissal of the suit with costs.;