1 2025:CGHC:4935-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR FA (MAT) No. 32 of 2022 Judgment Reserved on : 13/12/2024 Judgment Delivered on : 28 /01/2025  Smt. Vandana Sen, W/o Hem Kumar Sen, aged about 31 years, R/o Ward No.13, Rani Durgavati Ward Palari, Police Station Palari, District Baloda Bazar (C.G.). ---- Appellant / Defendant Versus  Hemkumar Sen, S/o Patiram Sen, aged about 39 years, R/o Ward No.03 Thakur Dev Square, Palari, Police Station Palari, District Baloda Bazar (C.G.) Other address : Ward No.13, Rani Durgavati Ward, Palari, Police Station Palari, District Baloda Bazar (C.G.) ---- Respondent / Plaintiff For Appellant : Mr. Vivek Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Advocate. Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey & Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru (C.A.V. Judgment) Per Rajani Dubey, J. 1. The present appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been preferred by the defendant/wife 2 against the judgment and decree dated 04.01.2022 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Baloda Bazar (C.G.), in H.M.A. No. 74A/2021 whereby, application preferred by the plaintiff/husband filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act was allowed. The parties to this appeal shall be referred herein as per their description before the Family Court. 2. Briefly stated fact of the case are that the plaintiff/husband instituted a suit claiming decree for dissolution of marriage on the grounds enumerated under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Acrt, 1955 (for short ‘the Act, 1955’). It is pleaded in the application that his marriage with the defendant/wife was solemnized on 27.05.2015 according to Hindu customs and on 20.09.2016 one child namely Lehaan was born out of their wedlock. According to the plaintiff/husband, the defendant/wife behaved properly in her in-laws’ house for about 01 years months. It was pleaded when the defendant/wife was admitted in hospital for delivery of child, at the relevant time, she started misbehaving with mother of plaintiff. It is further pleaded that the defendant started quarreling with the plaintiff and his parents over trivial issues and pressurized him to part away from his parents. During his posting at Raipur, there was unimaginable changes in the behavior and conduct of defendant/wife. The defendant never voluntarily performed the duty of being a faithful wife, 3 nor did she express her desire for cohabitation. The parents of the defendant directly and indirectly influenced the marriage and conjugal life of the plaintiff and used to give wrong advice to the defendant. The defendant was always busy with her mobile phone and used to go anywhere without the permission of plaintiff. The defendant, after having quarrel with the plaintiff, went to her maternal home on 22.06.2018 and after the family meeting and counseling of the defendant, she again came back and started living with the plaintiff in November, 2018. Even after that, there was no changes in the behavior of the defendant and became more fickle-minded. She expressed reluctance with the plaintiff and started behaving cruelly with the plaintiff while having interest in some other person. It is also pleaded that the plaintiff, looking to the position and prestige, brought the defendant to her original place at Palari and kept her with the family. In Palari also, there was no change in behaving of the defendant and she went to her parental home without informing the plaintiff. 3. It is also pleaded in the plaint that the plaintiff made every effort to save her married life. In this endeavor, he filed a complaint regarding the behavior of the defendant by submitting an application in the social meeting of Sirpur Raj, and in the social meeting, upon arriving at a mutual agreement, the plaintiff kept the defendant with him and 4 after a few days, in April 2020, the defendant went to her maternal home in Mahasamund without the permission and consent of the plaintiff and submitted an application against the plaintiff in Sakhi One Stop Center Mahasamund. During the said period, the defendant lived in her maternal home for about 02 months. The plaintiff again made effort to maintain her family life and brought her back to Palari., but the defendant started quarreling with the family members of the plaintiff and threatened to implicate the entire family in a false case. The defendant used to beat the plaintiff with hands and fists and kept depriving him of cohabitation and used to argue with him. The defendant did not talk to any member of the family. It is further pleaded in the plaint that the defendant, without any reason, fought with the plaintiff's parents on 15-07-2021 and tried to chop them with a sickle, a report of which was lodged by the plaintiff's mother Savitri Bai at the Police Station Palari. In this way, cruelty has been caused by continuously beating the plaintiff's parents. The said behavior of the defendant comes within the category of cruelty, as such, it is not possible for the plaintiff and the defendant to live a married life. It has been further pleaded in the plaint that the first cause of action arose when the defendant started torturing him mentally and causing cruelty after one year of marriage. On 22.06.2018, when the defendant went to her maternal home without informing him 5 even then the cause of action arose. Again cause of action arose when the defendant started living in her maternal house again in April 2020 after a dispute and on 15-07-2021 she went to her maternal house after beating the plaintiff's mother with a sickle, since then the cause of action has been continuously arising. Thereafter, on 22.07.2021, the plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce. 4. The defendant, in her reply, except admitted facts, denied all the allegations and stated that after the higher education of the defendant, she done PGDCA, B.Ed., ITI degree and diploma & all expenses were borne by the family of the defendant. The plaintiff used to suspect her fidelity used to get angry on trivial issues. The plaintiff used to beat the defendant. The plaintiff often beats the defendant by throwing her out of the house and insulting her when she asks for money. It was averred that the defendant has been a woman fully devoted to her married life, the clear proof of which is the birth of a son within about one and a half years of marriage, who has been taken away by the plaintiff and kept with him and the defendant has also been deprived of the happiness of having a child. The plaintiff has tortured the defendant by behaving cruelly with her throughout her married life. It was also averred that the plaintiff and his family were told by Sakhi Center but even after counseling 6 at the center, there was no change in the behaviour of the plaintiff. The defendant made every effort to save her married life but there was no change in the behaviour of the plaintiff. As the plaintiff is a government servant and out of fear and his services do not adversely affect, the plaintiff deliberately spread the rumor about the defendant among his relatives and offices out of malice and conspiracy that the defendant's conduct is not good and she has left her married life. The plaintiff has harassed and tormented the defendant throughout her married life and made her life difficult. Knowing that it had become impossible for the plaintiff to carry on his married life with him in June 2020, as part of a deliberate conspiracy, and believing that the plaintiff will take appropriate action against the plaintiff and his family, a false report was made by the plaintiff that she had assaulted him with a sickle. The plaintiff has installed an unnecessary camera to keep an eye on the defendant, injured himself in front of the camera and saved its screenshot. The plaintiff and his family have harassed the respondent throughout her life and she is also facing problems due to her old and serious health. 5. It has been also averred that the defendant has become dependent on her father. The plaintiff has conspired and filed a divorce application against the defendant for which there is no evidence. The plaintiff has tarnished the sacred 7 relationship of husband and wife by keeping surveillance on the defendant through CCTV camera. It was also pleaded that if the plaintiff is granted a divorce decree, the life of the respondent and her son would be in dark. Therefore, the suit of the plaintiff may be dismissed. 6. The learned Family Court, after examining oral and documentary evidence, allowed the application of plaintiff holding that the plaintiff has been successful in proving that the defendant has deserted him from six months and there is no cohabitation between them. The learned Family Court also recorded its finding that if for a while the plaintiff and the defendant would be asked to live a marital life by reconciling in someway, even then there would rift that has been developed between them with respect to marital life and the same cannot be filled up. Hence, the present appeal by the defendant. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that while passing the impugned judgment and decree the learned Family Court failed to appreciate the pleadings, the evidence and the material brought on records by the parties in its true prospective which has resulted into erroneous findings and consequent judgment. The essential ingredient of divorce under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955 has not been made out. The learned family Court has failed to appreciate that the plaintiff husband has failed to adduce 8 any evidence regarding the cruelty which has been done by the defendant wife. Learned counsel further submits that the learned Family Court failed to appreciate that from the very inception of the marriage between the parties, the plaintiff/husband and his family members were behaving in cruel manner with the defendant/wife. The learned Family Court has failed to appreciate the fact about respondent husband being doubtful, dubious and skeptical have been established by the evidence of defendant witnesses. The learned Family Court also failed to appreciate that the respondent husband has separated his son from her mother/appellant, for which the suit for getting custody of the child is pending consideration. Keeping the mother away from her son, that too when child is in tender age itself is a form of cruelty, which the learned Family Court did not consider while passing the impugned judgment. The learned Family Court failed to appreciate the fact that the plaintiff/husband has been continuously causing physical harassment and physical cruelty with the appellant. The learned Family Court has wrongly answered the issue No.2 despite there being sufficient evidence on record regarding mentality of the plaintiff. The learned Family Court has not at all appreciated the evidence adduced by the defendant as witness and other defendant witnesses. The learned Family Court ought to have considered that since the first day of 9 her marriage, the defendant has been tortured by the plaintiff and his family members continuously for the demand of dowry, and therefore, the defendant/appellant lodged a complaint against them under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel also submits that the learned Family Court has failed to appreciate that the appellant in her written statement pleaded that no efforts were made by the plaintiff/husband to normalize the relationship between them, even after the counseling at the mediation center (One Stop Sakhi Center). Thus, the finding recorded by the learned Family Court is perverse and the impugned judgment and decree is liable to be set aside. The alternate submission of learned counsel for the defendant/appellant is that the defendant/appellant has no source of income, as such, permanent alimony of Rs.10,00,000/- may be awarded in favour of the defendant/appellant. 8. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Kiran Jyot Maini V. Anish Pramod Patel reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1724. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for plaintiff/respondent supporting the impugned judgment and decree submits that the learned Family Court minutely appreciated oral and documentary evidence and has rightly granted the decree of divorce in favour of plaintiff/respondent. Learned counsel also submits that the plaintiff/husband is regularly paying 10 maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the defendant/wife and he is not in a position to pay huge amount. So, the appeal being without any merit is liable to be dismissed. 10. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 11. It is not disputed before the learned Family Court that the marriage of plaintiff/husband with defendant/wife was solemnized on 27.05.2015 and on 20.09.2016 one son namely Lehaan was born out of their wedlock. 12. The learned Family Court, on the basis of pleadings of both the parties framed four issues, which are reproduced for ready reference herein as under :- Dza- okn iz’u fu”d”kZ 1- D;k izfrokfnuh }kjk fookg ds i'pkr oknh ds lkFk dwzjrkiwoZd O;ogkj fd;k x;k \ gka 2- D;k oknh ekufld jksx ls ihfMr gS \ ugha 3- D;k oknh] izfrokfnuh ds lkFk laiUu fookg 27&05&2015 dks fo?kfVr djkdj fookg foPNsn dh vkKfIr izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gS \ Gka 4- Lkgk;rk ,oa O;; \ DafMdk 28 ds vkns’k vuqlkj 13. The plaintiff/husband has examined himself as PW/1, Anil Kumar Pathak (PW/2) and Ku. Manisha Yadav (PW/3) to prove his case and defendant/wife examined herself as DW/1 and her sister Smt. Kavita Arun Sen (DW/2) and one Makhan Lal Sen (DW/3). 11 14. Plaintiff/husband (PW/1) has stated in examination-in-chief that defendant/wife abused his mother and she pressurized him to live separately. He has also stated that on 22.06.2018, the defendant/wife without his consent went to her parental house along with her brother. The defendant/wife resided in her parental home for about 06 months and thereafter, a social meeting was convened where both the parties were made understand. Thereafter, defendant/wife came to his house and started residing with him at Palari. She used to pressurize him for living separately and started harassing his parents. He has also stated that when defendant/wife stayed with him, he sustained injury on his waist. The defendant/wife used to beat on his waist and also used to slap him. During her stay at Palari, the defendant/wife, on 02.04.2020, without his permission, went to her parental home quarreling with him and filed an application in Sakhi Center, Mahasamund, where three counseling were conducted and in the said counseling, after compromise he brought the defendant/wife back to his house. He has also stated that on 15.07.2021, the defendant/wife tried to assault his mother by sickle and the report of which was lodged by him in Police Station Palari, and thereafter, on 08.09.2021, the defendant/wife lodged a case under Section 498-A of IPC against him, his mother and younger daughter-in-law. This witness has filed 12 copy of written complaint (Ex.P/1) lodged in Police Station Palari, notice (Ex.P/2), copy of information of lodging of FIR against defendant/wife sent to Superintendent of Police, Mahasamund (Ex.P/3), police notice (Ex.P/4) and medical prescriptions (Ex.P/4) of plaintiff. In cross-examination, this witness has denied the suggestion of defendant/wife that he tortured family members of his wife. 15. Anil Kumar Pathak (PW/2) has also supported the statement of plaintiff/husband and stated that before the defendant/wife went to her parents’ house, the plaintiff/husband used to tell him that when he reach home late from the office, the defendant/wife had quarrel with him and she had bitten on his hand with her teeth. He has also stated that once the plaintiff/husband had bought torn vest to the office and when he asked him if he had brought a cloth for mopping, he said that his wife/defendant had torn the vest in quarrel. He has also stated that when the plaintiff/husband had went to bring the defendant/wife while she was at parental home, the plaintiff/husband had taken him (this witness) to Mahasamund and when they reached Mahasamund, the family members of defendant/wife said that they would send the defendant/wife only after bringing the eminent person of society. Thereafter, they came back to Raipur. 16. Ku. Manisha Yadav (PW/3) is neighbour of the 13 plaintiff/husband. She has also stated that the defendant/wife always used to quarrel with her husband/plaintiff and his family members & the defendant/wife used to say that she would not stay at Palari. 17. Defendant/wife (NAW/1) has denied all suggestions of plaintiff/husband and admitted this suggestion of husband/plaintiff that she studied after marriage but she denied the suggestion that the expenses of her study was born by plaintiff/husband. She has stated that the expenses of her study was born by her father but she has not produced any document/receipt in this regard to substantiate her case. The defendant/wife has admitted that from 2017 to 2020, the plaintiff has been regularly treated in different hospitals. She has admitted that she did not go to her in-laws’ house from 2020. She has admitted that on 15.07.2021, after a dispute with his in-laws, she came to her maternal home in Mahasamund. She has also stated that it is true that on 15.07.2021, a report was lodged by her against her mother-in-law for attacking her with a sickle but she herself stated that a false report was lodged against her husband/plaintiff and his family members. 18. Smt Kavita Arun Sen (NAW/3), sister of defendant/wife, has also stated in her examination-in-chief that the plaintiff is suspicious by nature and is mentally ill. The plaintiff used to beat the defendant suspecting her over small things. The 14 plaintiff used to keep an eye on all the places in the house by installing CCTV camera. In cross-examination, this witness has admitted that after the plaintiff filed suit for divorce, they lodged a report under Section 498-A IPC at Mahasamund against the plaintiff in which she is a witness. 19. Makhanlal Sen (PW/3) is President of Sirpur Mahasabha Sen Caste. He has stated that three social meetings were convened by them in which both the parties were made understand to lead peaceful married life. 20. The learned Family Court also minutely appreciated oral and documentary evidence of both the parties and recorded its finding that defendant/wife and her family members have falsely accused the plaintiff/husband of being mentally ill and decided the issued No.2 against defendant/wife & has also rightly recorded its finding that the defendant/wife committed cruelty with plaintiff/husband and decided Issue Nos. 1 and 3 in favour of plaintiff/husband and granted decree of divorce. 21. It is evident from the statement of defendant/wife that she is residing in her parental home since 2021 and the plaintiff/husband made many efforts to bring back the defendant/wife in order to restitute the conjugal right by way of compromise in social meeting and also in Sakhi One Stop Center but all his efforts went in vain. There is no cohabitation between them since 2021 and in such a 15 situation, reunion of the parties becomes impossible. The learned Family Court having minutely appreciated oral and documentary evidence, has rightly granted decree of divorce in favour of plaintiff/husband. 22. As regards permanent alimony, it is an admitted position that the plaintiff/husband is regularly paying Rs.15,000/- per month to the defendant/wife since 16.04.2024. It is also apparent that the plaintiff/husband is working as Assistant Grade-II in CSPDCL and is drawing salary of Rs.68,244/- per month. Thus, looking to the affidavit filed by both the parties, the maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month as is being given by the plaintiff/husband to the defendant/wife in compliance of Family Court’s order, in the opinion of this Court, is just and proper maintenance. As such, there is no need to award any permanent alimony in favour of the defendant/wife. 23. On the basis of the forgoing discussion, the decree for dissolution of marriage is affirmed which eventually leads to dismissal of the appeal. The parties shall bear their respective costs. 24. Let a decree be drawn-up accordingly. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Judge pekde Digitally signed by VIJAY BHARATRAO PEKDE Date: 2025.01.28 18:11:23 +0530