- (1.) This First Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 28.07.2004 and the decree signed on 06.08.2004 passed in T.M.S. Case No.181 of 2001 by which the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad, dismissing the suit filed by the appellant-husband for a decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and a further direction was given by the court-below to the appellant-husband to pay a sum of Rs.7000/- per month to the respondent-wife from the month of July, 2004 which included Rs.4000/-per month for the wife and Rs.3000/- per month for the minor son, Lalan Kumar upto attaining age of majority.
(2.) The case of the appellant-husband, in brief, is as under: (i) That the plaintiff/appellant-husband got married with the defendant/respondent-wife on 20.05.1985 according to Hindu rites and customs. It was alleged by the appellant-husband that after marriage the respondent-wife came to his house however, seldom lived with him because she was not adjusting with him and used to insult him in various ways from time to time in presence of his family members, friends and neighbours. The appellant-husband disclosed that out of the said wed-lock a son named Lalan Kumar was born on 25.10.1988. The allegation put forward by the appellant-husband was that he had no relationship with the respondent-wife either physical, mental or social, though she was living in his house since last 13 years. The appellant-husband said that he was bearing the entire cost of maintenance of his wife and son. He was Probationary Officer in a bank and always resided out of his house to maintain peace in the family. (ii) It has been further alleged in the plaint by the appellant-husband that in his absence, the respondent-wife developed physical relationship with many persons. When she was in her advanced stage of pregnancy of about seven months, he came to know about the same on 19.08.2001. He was shocked and surprised to see his wife pregnant because there had been no physical relationship between them. It has further been stated by the appellant-husband that he raised objection and pressurized the respondent-wife for D.N.A. test to show and prove that she was not conceived from him, but she became adamant and flatly refused to do so and threatened him to implicate in false case with the support of her family members and see him behind bars. It was stated that it was impossible for him to continue the marital relationship with her because of her cruel behaviour and adultery. The appellanthusband filed suit on 20.08.2001 seeking for a decree of divorce against respondent-wife on the ground of cruelty and adultery of the respondent-wife. (iii) Later on, after instituting the plaint, the appellant-husband on 20.10.2001, filed a specific application before the Court below disclosing the name of his father, namely, Raj Nandan Sharma S/o Sakaldeep Singh as the adulterer stating that his wife was very soon going to deliver a child out of the alleged adultery.
(3.) On the other hand, the respondent-wife appeared and filed her written statement before the Court below. It was stated by her that the female child (alleged to be illegitimate by the appellant-husband) was delivered by her on 19.11.2001 out of the matrimonial relationship with the appellant-husband but the said female child died on 07.12.2001. She specifically pleaded the paternity of the appellant-husband with respect to the said child. She explicitly said that she was willing for the D.N.A. test as proposed by the appellant-husband and inflicted counter allegations of torture, cruelty and adulterous relationship on the part of the appellant-husband. She further stated that the appellant-husband had neglected her and their son and therefore, she asked for alimony pendente-lite under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The respondent-wife has alleged that the appellant-husband left the house to live with some other lady to whom he wants marry.;