In a matrimonial dispute, the court must carefully evaluate the evidence presented by both parties to determine whether the allegations of cruelty or desertion have been established. The court must also consider whether the spouse seeking restitution of conjugal rights has made genuine attempts to reconcile with the other spouse.

Mrinal Kanti Chaudhuri, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated March 15, 2012 in Matrimonial Suit No. 78 of 2009 and 79 of 2009 passed by learned Additional District Judge, 4th Court at Alipore, District 24 Parganas (S).

2. The husband filed a Matrimonial Suit No. 78 of 2009 praying for a decree of divorce and the wife filed a Matrimonial Suit No. 79 of 2009 praying for restitution of conjugal rights. Learned trial court disposed of the Suits analogously and decreed the Mat Suit No. 78 of 2009 under Section 13(1)(ia) of Hindu Marriage Act filed by the husband Biplab Bhowal against his wife Bipasha Bhowal on contest without cost and dismissed the Matrimonial Suit No. 79 of 2009 filed by the wife Bipasha Bhowal against her husband Biplab Bhowal under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act on contest without cost.

3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree, the wife has preferred these appeals as appellant.

4. The husband, in Mat Suit No. 78 of 2009, is plaintiff and the wife in the said Suit is defendant. On the other hand, the wife, in Mat Suit No. 79 of 2009, is plaintiff and the husband in the said suit is defendant. In order to avoid confusion, it would be wise to term the parties as husband and wife.

5. The parties were married on 21st July, 1986 according to Hindu rites and customs, at 88, Garfa Main Road, Police Station Kasba, Kolkata-700075. After marriage, they led conjugal life at the residence of the husband's parents at 65, Southend Park, P.S. Lake, Kolkata-700209 where the marriage was consummated.

6. The case of the husband is that, shortly after marriage the husband found the wife to be indifferent towards him on the basis of her suspicious nature and conduct. During their conjugal life, two children were born. The first child, a daughter was born on 28th November, 1989 and the second child, a son was born on 10th December, 1999.

7. The husband alleged that since the inception of marriage, the wife subjected him and his family members to outrageous and insulting behaviour and this caused the husband a great deal of mental anguish. The husband further stated that the wife tried to dominate and intimidate by threat of suicide and by her use of coarse, vulgar, obscene language and thereby she destroyed his mental peace. The husband suffered at the hands of the wife who was aided and abetted by her associates. Due to the wife's cruel act and conduct the husband reasonably apprehended that it would be impossible for him to resume conjugal residence with the wife and it would be harmful and injurious to his mind and health.

8. The husband has given the following particulars of cruel treatment of the wife:-

(1) The husband found that the wife was suffering from introvertness and abnormality from the beginning of the marriage.

(2) The wife is suffering from suspicious mind. She used to suspect the husband to have been living in illicit relationship with various women. As a result, she used to behave in an irresponsible manner indulging her slander, coarseness, vulgarity even involving the members of the husband's family and thereby she suspected the character of the husband without any basis and reason.

(3) The wife had an intractable temper and ruled the husband down. During the conjugal life, there were several occasions where husband had to bear the full blast of wife's fury with no fault of his own.

(4) The husband narrated the conduct of the wife to her parents but in vain. She intended to split up the solidarity of the family of the husband by vilifying and slandering the members of the family by all means.

(5) The wife did not respect the husband and expressed her view to control the normal movements and activities of the husband.

(6) She was found negligent to discharge her normal duty and obligations towards the husband in the matter of leading conjugal life. The husband had to adjust the misconduct of the wife in consideration of his status, position and future of the c