The court emphasized the importance of discussing the evidence on record and considering the parameters laid down by the Apex Court in various decisions for granting divorce on the ground of cruelty.

Utpalendu Bikas Saha, J.

1. The instant Matrimonial Appeal is filed by the wife-Appellant, who was Respondent in T.S. (Divorce)/FC/63 of 2004 challenging the Order, dated 04.02.2006 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Agartala, West Tripura in aforesaid Title Suit wherein the learned Family Judge allowed the prayer for divorce made by the Respondent-husband, who was the Petitioner in the aforesaid suit.

2. We have heard Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant as well as Mr. P.K. Biswas, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent.

3. The fact needed to be discussed for disposal of the instant appeal is as follows:-

The Appellant is the legally married wife of the Respondent and their marriage was solemnized in the month of August, 1992 according to the Hindu rites and customs in presence of their near relatives in the parental house of Appellant. After completion of the marriage, both Appellant and Respondent live together as husband and wife happily for near about 10 years and out of their wedlock, a male child was born namely, Diptanu. In the year, 2004, the Respondent-husband of the Appellant, a Government employee working in Police Department as Home guard filed the above Title Suit (Divorce) under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The said suit was contested by the present Appellant-wife, who was Respondent in the Title Suit. The allegation of the Respondents in his petition inter alia is that the present wife-Appellant, Respondent in the suit started ill behave with the Respondent-husband and other inmates and did not take proper care towards the Respondent and his mother and not only that, she also left the house of the Respondent without any consent and permission and used to go to her parental house at any time and move frequently and when she was asked by the Respondents, why she was leaving her matrimonial house off and on, she replied that she is not interested to stay at Badharghat and stayed in the matrimonial house at Badharghat and if the Respondent will not agreed to stay at Lalsingmura, Appellant would leave the house of the Petitioner at any time and ultimately on 16.01.2000, all in a sudden the Appellant left the house of the Petitioner along with her son without any permission and consent showing that she was going for ever and the consequence would be faced by the Respondent and his family members. Appellant though contested the case, but could not appear on date fixed for her cross-examination i.e. 04.02.2006 and on that date, the learned Family Judge take up the petition for divorce for ex parte hearing in her absence and ultimately, passed the order allowing the prayer for divorce. Hence, the same is under challenge to this Court by way of the instant appeal.

4. Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant-wife while urging for setting aside the impugned order would contend that the impugned order is passed by the learned Family Judge without providing any opportunity to the Appellant for cross-examination. In fact at the first instance, the learned Family Court taken up the matter for ex parte hearing even he did not try to know what was the reason for non-appearance of the Appellant, Respondent in the suit and not only that learned Family Judge also did not state the reasons for passing the impugned order, he again contended. By such a non reasoned order, a matrimonial dispute should not be allowed to be decided. He further contended that the Apex Court in various decision including the decision in the case of Shobha Rani vs. Madhukar Reddi, (1988)1 SCC 105: AIR 1994 SC 710 discussed about cruelty and not only that in the case of In the case of V. Bhagat vs. D. Bhagat (1994)1 SCC 337 and in the case of Subhash Chander Sharma vs. Anjali Sharma AIR 2011 SC 151 (DEL), the Delhi High Court also taking note of the observation of Apex Court st