BHATTACHARYA, J.

(1). This first appeal is at the instance of a husband in a suit for restitution of conjugal right and in the alternative, for divorce on the ground of cruelty and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9th June, 2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Third Court, Alipore, in Matrimonial Suit No.34 of 1997, thereby granting a decree for restitution of conjugal rights.

(2). Being dissatisfied, the husband has come up with the present appeal thereby praying for a decree of divorce.

(3). The appellant before us filed in the Court of District Judge, South 24-Parganas, a suit being Matrimonial Suit No.34 of 1997, under Section 22 and/or alternatively under Section 27(1) (d) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights with further prayer that in the event the wife-respondent was found to oppose the prayer for restitution of conjugal rights, a decree for divorce should be passed on the ground of cruelty. The said suit was subsequently transferred to the Third Court of Additional District Judge, Alipore, and was renumbered as Matrimonial Suit No.665 of 1997.

(4). The case made out by the appellant in the aforesaid suit may be summed up thus:-(a) The parties were married on 10th February, 1981 under Special Marriage Act and in the wedlock, a male child was born on 15th June, 1990. (b) The appellant is a Government servant and working as a Stenographer Grade-I and is attached to the Directorate of Rationing, Food and Supplies Department, Government of West Bengal. The wife- respondent is also a steno-typist and at the time of presentation of the Matrimonial Suit, had been working in the Calcutta Municipal Corporation in its Head Office and was attached to the Personnel Department. (c) The appellant, in order to live and lead a happy matrimonial life, built a house with his own money by taking loan from the Government of West Bengal sometime in the year 1992, the address of which is described in the cause-title of the application. The respondent, although was an earning member of the family of the appellant, never contributed a single farthing in the family except paying salary of the two part-time maids. She never contributed a single copper towards the construction of the building. She had her bank accounts but never kept the pass-books in the matrimonial home. The respondent had shown a little interest in the matter of upbringing the child in a decent manner. At least thrice in a week, she used to go to her mothers house at Sobha Bazar without making arrangement for the appellants basic and minimum requirement of food, cooking and tiffin etc. and the appellant had to arrange those of his own and there were occasions, when the husband had to go to his office without food and took lunch in a hotel in his office-locality. (d) The respondent is a peculiar type of woman and used to return to the matrimonial home from her office always at about 9/9.30 p.m. and if the appellant enquired of the reasons for coming so late, the respondent used to shout at the top of her voice and in the process, the appellant was put to embarrassment and was lowered in the estimation of the neighbours. (e) On or about June 20,1996 the respondent went to Thakurpukur Police Station and gave a statement that the appellant died early in the morning by taking overdose of sleeping pill. The police rushed to investigate the matter and were deceived and they left the place after rebuking the respondent. (f) The respondent was a nagging lady and persuaded the appellant to transfer the house property in her favour and the appellant, to pacify her illegal demand, tried to explain that since he had taken loan to construct the building, he would not be in a position to make any conveyance in her favour as the property remained mortgaged with his employer. The respondent not being a lady of good understanding or amenable to reasons, became furious over the matter and filed a complaint