JUDGMENT ARUNA SURESH, J. 1. Under challenge in this appeal is the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge dated 8th April, 1997 whereby the petition of the appellant filed under Section 13 (1) (ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act was dismissed.

2. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that parties to the petition were married on 8.12.1974 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. One male child Ankur Bose was borne out of the wedlock on 7.8.1978. Respondent is an alcoholic. Many a times he remained out of job and under the influence of liquor and even otherwise he used to treat the petitioner with cruelty. Respondent had to vacate the rental premises on account of non payment of rent and petitioner had to depend for financial support on her parents. Respondent had stopped taking care of the family needs. After vacating the rented accommodation parties started living in the house of Petitioner?s parents. After shifting to her parents house, petitioner continued with her job and in the evenings she started going to theater leaving her child in the care of her parents because Respondent did not show any inclination or interest to look after the child. Petitioner became pregnant again, to which Respondent expressed his shock and disowned the child as his own. He suspected her fidelity and Petitioner had to go for medical termination of the pregnancy. To meet his drinking habit, he used to take money from the Petitioner or her parents and some times even sold out household articles. Petitioner was allotted a flat and Respondent wanted to sell the allotment letter to which Petitioner did not agree. This resulted into hurling of abuses and physical beatings to the Petitioner by the Respondent. The disputes and differences increased to the extent that parties stopped their physical relations. Petitioner sought guidance from a voluntary organization Saheli?, where Respondent was called and the differences were reconciled with a view to restart the matrimonial life. Parties started living together w.e.f. 20.08.1989. However, disputes and differences continued as before. On 2.12.1989, allegedly a scene was created in the house and Respondent took out a kitchen knife to assault the Petitioner but, when their son intervened, he sustained injuries and was hospitalized. Petitioner lodged a complaint about this incident with the police on 3.12.1989. Since 2.12.1989 parties are living separately.

3. Respondent has refuted the allegations of the Petitioner that he is alcoholic or that he had been beating his wife and the child or that he did not take care of him or that he had no interest in the child. He has alleged that he never deserted the Petitioner but was forced to leave the house on 2.12.1989. He has also alleged that he had to vacate the rented accommodation because of eviction decree suffered by him for bona fide necessity and not on account of non payment of rent.

4. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed for consideration by the Court:-

(1) Whether the Respondent has treated the Petitioner with cruelty as alleged?

(2) Whether the Respondent has deserted the Petitioner for continous period of two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition as alleged?

(3) Relief.

5. Respondent has been contesting the appeal in person. On 6th August, 2009 he had stated that he was ready and willing to divorce the Petitioner by mutual consent provided he was given half share in MIG flat No.57-D, Pocket IV, Mayur Vihar, Phase-1, in which he claimed himself to be the co-owner with the appellant. He had also agreed that if the appellant was able to show Conveyance Deed in her favour in respect of the said flat, he would divorce her. Thereafter the matter was listed for 12th August, 2009 with the direction to the appellant to produce the Conveyance Deed of the said flat. However, on 12.08.2009, the Respondent did not appear though appellant had brought the original Conveyance Deed executed in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document