- (1.) This appeal, at the instance of the appellant, is directed against the judgment dated 28-8-1998 and decree dated 7-9-1998 passed in Matrimonial Suit No. 19/13 of 1991-97.
(2.) The case of the petitioner - appellant in brief is that the petitioner is Hindu governed by Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on 25th July, 1982 at quarter No. 12, Jaba Road, Haludbani, P. S. Parsudih, town Jamshedpur, District Singhbhum East according to Hindu rites and customs and after marriage respondent came to her Sasural and both the petitioner - appellant and respondent lived together as husband'and wife from 26-7-82 to 1-4- 85. Their marriage was consummated and out of the wedlock a son was born to the petitioner and respondent on 18-11-83. The petitioner was maintaining a very good and cordial relation with the respondent. It is stated that during the stay with petitioner the respondent behaved very irrationally with him and his family members and she used to quarrel with all of them and this caused mental suffering to the petitioner. It is further submitted that respondent used to go out of matrimonial home without consent of the petitioner and when petitioner used to protest, then she used to quarrel with him and it is alleged that on 2-4-85 respondent's mother Rita Banerjee took the respondent to her home on the plea that respondent shall be staying there for a month and thereafter she will return to the house of the petitioner and at that time mother of the petitioner was seriously ill and petitioner and his family members requested the respondent not to leave her matrimonial home but respondent left the house with her child and articles and did not return from there. The petitioner went to the house of the mother of the respondent several times and even persuaded the respondent to return with him but the respondent declined and refused to stay with the petitioner as husband and wife and respondent even misbehaved with the petitioner. On 1-8-86 mother of the petitioner died and on this very occasion the respondent was requested and even persuaded to come but she did not come. In the month of July a panchayati was also held in presence of the petitioner and respondent but that panchayati could not materialize on count of interference by the mother of the respondent and respondent. Thereafter respondent instituted a case under section 125 Cr. P. C. for grant of maintenance for herself as well as for her child, which was numbered as Misc. Case No. 6.87 and the aforesaid case was decided on 11 - 1-91 and petitioner was directed to make payment of Rs. 300 per month in favour of the respondent and Rs. 200 per month for the child and the petitioner has been paying Rs. 500 per month as maintenance to the respondent and her child. It is alleged that she has deserted continuously for a period of more than 5 years and there has been no cohabitation between the petitioner and respondent during the said period and this has caused cruelty to the petitioner and, therefore, this suit for decree of divorce has been instituted.
(3.) Respondent appeared and filed written statement and submitted that petition is not maintainable. It is alleged that ever since marriage of the respondent with petitioner, mother, sister and brother of the petitioner continuously ill-treated and misbehaved with her for the sake of dowry. Respondents are poor persons and not in a position to meet heavy demands of dowry and that led to ill-treatment of the respondent by the petitioner and his family members and ill-treatment included ruthless beating and some time denial of meal by the petitioner and inmates of his house. It is denied that during her stay with petitioner, she behaved irrationally with the petitioner and his family members and she used to quarrel with them. It is also denied that on 2-4-85 her mother came and took her away and on the other hand, it is stated that a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was demanded from the mother of the respondent for construction of room, which was not fulfilled by the respondent and by her mother, as a result of which respondent was mercilessly beaten by the petitioner and ultimately driven out of the house with only one torn sari. She has not taken any article with her. It is also denied that petitioner ever visited her mother's house for taking her away. All allegations that petitioner visited the house of the mother of the respondent and persuaded her and her mother for taking her away are not correct and on the other hand, petitioner always demanded Rs. 10,000/- as dowry.;