JAYA BASFORE Vs. SHYAMAL BASFORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed under Sec. 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 read with Sec. 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the Judgment and decree dtd. 14/9/2020 & 1/10/2020 passed by the learned Addl. Judge, Family Court, Agartala, West Tripura in T.S.(Div) 366/2019 allowing the petition for divorce filed by the respondent.

(2.) The brief fact of the case is that the marriage of the respondent with the appellant was solemnized according to Hindu Rites and Customs on 5/12/2006 at Teliamura in the paternal house of the appellant. The respondent and the appellant stayed peacefully and during their wedlock two children were born. They have spent ten years without any anxiety. But during the last two years, the behaviour of the appellant towards the respondent changed and the appellant was having an illicit relationship with another person. The respondent tried to convince the appellant about the duty of a good wife and to leave the bad habits. He also reminded her of the duty to look after the respondent, his old parents, and their children. On 3/10/2019, the appellant left the house of the respondent without any reason. Thereafter the respondent-husband herein filed a petition of divorce before the learned Family Court.

(3.) The appellant duly received the notice from the learned Family Court. On 13/9/2019, the appellant appeared before the learned Family Court. On that day, the learned Family Court fixed the matter for reconciliation and filing of written statement on 8/11/2019. After getting the notice from the Court, the appellant contracted with the learned counsel, namely, Smt. Mallika Deb(Saha) who advised her to be present before the learned Family Court on 9/11/2019. On 8/11/2019, the appellant meet with the learned counsel, namely, Smt. Mallika Deb(Saha) who informed her that the husband-respondent was absent and the Court is not available, so, the appellant need not appear before the learned Family Court. The learned counsel also told her that the next date would be informed by her clerk. After a few days, due to the treatment of her father-in-law, the appellant along with her in-laws and children went to Silchar. In the middle part of December, the appellant came back and tried to contact the learned counsel for getting information about her case and requested the learned counsel to prepare the written statement against the petition filed by the respondent. The learned counsel informed the appellant that as the respondent-husband did not appear before the learned Family Court, the appellant's presence is not required as the suit would be dismissed. Thereafter, the learned counsel for the appellant informed her that due to the pandemic situation, the Court is not working and when the Court will resume, she would inform her.