JUDGMENT :

UDAY KUMAR, J.

1. The Judgment and decree of Ld. Additional District Judge 4th Court, Pashim Midnapur passed in Mat Suit No. 512 of 2008 on May 25th 2009 is the subject matter of this appeal, whereby the learned Trial Judge has decreed the suit instituted Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by petitioner-respondent Prashant Kumar Mandal for termination of his marital ties solemnized on 2nd July, 2001 with the appellant-respondent-wife Jharna Mandal. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order, appellant-Wife Jharna Mandal has preferred this appeal.

2. The emotional warmth in matrimonial relationship of Prashant Kumar Mandal and Jharna Mandal has gradually eroded due to constant commotions which arose in their life after few months of their marriage solemnized on 2nd July 2001. The unemployment of Prashant was the root cause of her agony and turbulence in their matrimonial life. Though, Prashant was earning from his profession of part-time teaching in school and from private tuition, yet the same was not sufficient to satisfy the financial requirement of his family. So, he occasionally asked money from appellant Jharna; as she was getting honorarium of Rs. 1400/- per month from her employment of ‘Anganbari worker’ posted at Basulia I.C.D.S Centre. Her grievance against Prashant and his family over this issue was not redressed properly as such her feeling of hatred towards petitioner and in-laws were regularly expressed through her misbehavior. She always cursed him for his cowardice attitude and she became belligerent to her in-laws which gradually increased after birth of their daughter Trishna on 03rd December 2003. However, Prashant tried his level best to tune relation with appellant but of no avail, rather she abetted him for committing suicide.

3. Leading to the disturbances in their matrimonial life, Jharna left her matrimonial home with her belongings threatening to teach them a lesion. Later she lodged a written complaint to Chandrakona town P.S. upon which P.S case number 70 of 2007 dated 04th July 2007 U/s 498A, ¾ D.P. Act, was initiated against them. On the other hand, petitioner instituted Matrimonial suit 362 of 2007 u/s 13 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955, for decree of divorce, in which Ld. Additional District Judge 4th Court, Paschim Midnapur had passed an order for payment of maintenance of Rs. 1000/- to minor daughter and 3000/- to wife as litigation cost within 15 days from the date of order by husband, in connection with her petition u/s 24 of H.M. Act 1955, but on the prayer of husband the suit was dismissed for non-prosecution on 10th June 2008 as he was unable to pay the amount. Subsequently, Prashant Kumar Mandal was selected for a job of Sahayak Panchayat Assistant but his joining was delayed due to non-clearance of Police Verification Report by Dy. S.P. (D.E.B) on the ground of pending criminal case lodged against him by Jharna.

4. On 24th July 2008, petitioner and his mother went to the house of appellant to bring her back to matrimonial home but she refused by stating that “I will not go, there will be no compromise and I will not allow the petitioner for getting his service.” Such behaviour of appellant towards respondent and his parents and relative had triggered feeling of strong aversion, hatred and bitterness in Prashant to the extent that he decided to terminate his marital bond with Jharna by a decree of divorce. Hence the Mat Suit No 512 of 2008 dated 30th July 2008 under section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955. On the contrary, the Appellant-O.P has challenged this suit on the ground of its maintainability as was barred by principle of res-judicata because his earlier matrimonial suit 362 of 2007 u/s 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was dismissed by competent court on 10th June 2008.

5. She controverted the material allegations of plaint by filing written statement. She stated therein that since her marriage; she was residing jointly at her matrimonial home and gave birth to