HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Bijayesh Mukherji, S. K. Datta
SACHINDRANATH CHATTERJEE - Appellant
Versus
SM. NILIMA CHATTERJEE - Respondent
A. F. O. D. 399 Of 1965
Decided On : MAY 16, 1969
( 1 ) THE appellant in this case is Dr. Sachindra Nath Chatterjee, M. B. and D. T. M. (Calcutta), D. M. R. (Madras), D. M. R. T. (England), and Reader, Radiotherapy, Medical College, Calcutta, and the respondent is his wife, Sm. Nilima Chatterjee; they are referred to hereinafter as simply Sachindra and Nilima.
( 2 ) SACHINDRA is now about fifty-five and Nilima fifty years of age.
( 3 ) THE appeal is brought from a Judgment and decree dated December 16, 1964, of a learned Additional District Judge, Alipore, dismissing Sachindra's petition dated January 19. 1962, for divorce on the ground of Nilima's adultery: just the ground under Section 13, Sub-section (1), Clause (i), of the Hindu Marriage Act 25 of 1955, or, in the alternative, for Judicial separation on the ground of "severe cruelty and tremendous torture" by her. : just the ground under Section 10, Subsection (1), Clause (b), thereof.
( 4 ) SACHINDRA and Nilima, Hindus both, and domiciled in India too, were married In accordance with Hindu rites, some thirty-two years ago from today, to be exact, on Asarh 14,1344 B. S. , corresponding to June 28, 1937, in the town of Barisal, now in East Pakistan. Sachindra, then an M. Sc. student, was about twenty-three and Nilima, then or thereabouts a matriculate, eighteen years of age.
( 5 ) NILIMA's father had died long before her marriage. She was, therefore, brought up by her mother's father, Chandrakanta Chakrabarti, a practising muktear of the Barisal courts at the relevant time. Indeed, in his house at Barisal the marriage was solemnized.
( 6 ) THE ceremony of marriage over, Nilima moved, as usual, to Sachindra's ancestral home at Bakal, also In the district of Barisal or Backarganj, as it is called, and continued living there, broken by periodic visits to her grandfather Chandrakanta's place. Sachindra was with her too at Bakal, but only for thirteen days, after which he returned to Calcutta, as indeed he had to, leaving Nilima behind, with a view to prosecuting Ms studies. Prosecute that he did on return to Calcutta But soon enough the course he was in, did undergo a change. A change, because he discontinued reading for M. Sc. , and, in 1938, got into the medical college instead. There he had continued until 1944 when he passed the M. B. examination. Having graduated so, he worked there as house physician and house surgeon until 1946's end or thereabouts. Then, he took to studies again --this time for the D. T. M. course --until April 1947, and, in due course, obtained the diploma he was working for. But there he did not rest. From July 1947 to June 1948 he was in Madras, "doing" the D. M. R. course, and succeeded in getting this diploma as well.
( 7 ) PASSING by, for the time being, still another feather in his cap --a D. M. R. T.--which he earned In England, after having stayed and toiled there from March 1956 to February 1958 or thereabouts, it is time now to notice, in the barest outline, how the connubial relation developed between the two spouses, Sachindra having left Nilima, his newly wedded wife, at Bakal, only thirteen days after the marriage. While in the medical college --and Sachindra was there, first as a student from 1938 to 1944, and then as a house physician and the like until 1946's end --he did visit Nilima at Bakal, but only once or twice a year, and that too for not more than eight to ten days at a time. Nilima in turn, did come from Bakal to Sachindra's Calcutta residence at 4d Mohanlal Street (shortened hereafter into "4d") in the northern part of the town and so close to a well known park of the locality the Deshabandhu Park. Such visits, however, by her to Sachindra here in Calcutta were very few, only three or four, and for short duration as well on each occasion. Only in July 1948 she was "permanently shifted" to "4d" --an address which bulks large in this matrimonial litigation, so unpleasant and unfortunate.
( 8 ) THERE were three children of the marriage --two daught
John White v. Kathleen Olive White
Lachman Utamchand v. Meena, 1964
Adelaide Mande Tobias v. William Albert Tobias
Kamal Krishna Deb v. Birju Kumvakar
Seturatnam Aiyar v. Venkatachala Goudan
Chidambara Sivaprakasa Pandara Sannadhigal v. Veerama Reddi
Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. Commr. of Income-tax
gpt-4
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.