Important Point – Where a marriage is broken down irretrievably, insistence by one to continue with matrimonial bond itself would be evidence of desire to inflict further cruelty on other.

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.

1. Petition filed by the appellant seeking annulment of the marriage between the appellant and the respondent on ground of desertion and cruelty has been dismissed by the learned Judge Family Court vide impugned judgment and decree dated March 12, 2012. We note at the outset that in the heading of the judgment the date of pronouncement is recorded as March 12, 2011, but while signing the decision the date mentioned is March 12, 2012.

2. The parties were married on December 04, 1992 and were blessed with a son on November 25, 1993 and a daughter on August 19, 1996. The children are major as of today and are with the appellant.

3. Case pleaded by the appellant was that one Bachraji Chochoraria, a maternal uncle of the respondent brought the two families to discuss the matrimonial alliance. The marriage never took off because the respondent always remained aloof and haughty with the appellant and his family. In March, 1993, for no apparent cause or reason the respondent tried to commit suicide by hanging herself. Her maternal uncle Bachraji Chochoraria was informed. Before him the respondent simply cried without stating the reason for her action. That on flimsy excuses the respondent used to leave the matrimonial house at Kolkata and stay with her parents at Delhi. She would break her bangles, a most inauspicious thing for a Hindu wife. She would bang the door. Shout and yell in the house for no apparent reason. When she was in the family way in the year 1993, she left for Delhi where the son was born on November 25, 1993, information whereof was not given to the appellant and he learnt of being blessed with a son when he rang up the respondent from Kolkata to enquire about her health. The appellant and his family members came to Delhi but were given a cold reception in the parental house of the respondent. To his surprise the appellant saw the respondent not breast feeding the new born baby and giving him buffalo milk. In spite of requests the respondent did not come to Kolkata with the baby boy. She did not come to her matrimonial house till April, 1994, when appellant came to Delhi only to find the baby boy admitted at St.Stephens Hospital. That the respondent had no respect for her in-laws. Appellant’s mother being bed ridden was not even given a glass of water by the respondent. That the respondent had a violent temper. That the appellant had to shift from the rented flat which was the matrimonial house of the parties on December 06, 2005. On December 23, 2005 the appellant was compelled to take shelter at his sister’s residence. On March 24, 2006, in the

presence of respectable persons, a mutual agreement was executed as per which the appellant undertook to bear all expenses for the children and the respondent with an understanding that if within a year of the agreement the parties could not resolve the pending issues they would agree to a divorce by mutual consent. On May 12, 2007 the respondent left Kolkata with the children. The parties could not patch up.

4. In the written statement filed by her, the respondent denied the allegations made against her. Admitting that the appellant walked out of the matrimonial house on December 23, 2005, the respondent claims this to be a deliberate act intended to leave respondent and her children at the mercy of God. As per the respondent, the appellant was under the influence of his parents and it was they who used to dictate his life. To quote: ‘even the petitioner who claimed himself to be educated person, in fact behaved like a uncultured, uncivilized and child like person much under the influence of his parents, in the past 15 years of matrimonial life and still indulged in thumb sucking like a child.’ As per the respondent, the family of the appellant did not want a daughter-in-law but desired a domestic servant to look after the ailing mother of the appellant and her two aged parents. From the third day after the marriage the respondent was asked t