1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed in T.S. No. 4(Div.)/2004 dated 30.5.2005 by the learned Addl. District Judge (F.T.C.), North Tripura, Kailashahar, thereby dissolving the marriage between the Appellant and the Respondent by granting the decree of divorce as prayed for by the husband/Respondent.

2. Heard Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned Counsel for the Appellant/wife and Mr. D.B. Sengupta, learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/Respondent.

3. The case of the Plaintiff/Respondent as pleaded in the plaint is that his first wife having expired on 24.7.1998 in a vehicular accident leaving three minor daughters, the Plaintiff married the Defendant/Appellant primarily to look after his children and age old mother following Hindu rights and customs on 23.10.1998. That the Appellant/wife concealed the actual date of birth at the time of marriage and she was also suffering from certain ailments which were not disclosed to the Plaintiff, that after the marriage, the Defendant/wife began to torture the minor daughters and the old mother of the Plaintiff brutally and on a number of occasions they were kept in starvation without giving any food and she never perform her responsibility as their mother and in spite of advice of the Plaintiff she did not mend herself. The Defendant/wife was also in the habit of leaving the house of the Plaintiff frequently without caring for the children and his old mother. With a view to resolve the differences and disputes that cropped between the parties at the initiation of the Plaintiff several rounds of discussions were held by the village panchayat organized by the local Nari Samittee and also vide discussions held on 16.5.2003 the Defendant was advised to live with her peacefully and to be sober with all the family members including the minor children, but instead of following such advice given by the elders in the panchayat, the Defendant left the matrimonial home and on 23.5.2010 the Plaintiff having protested against certain untoward activities of the she became furious and after assaulting the Plaintiff left the matrimonial house and since then she is residing separately. The Plaintiff is also paying Rs. 1,000 as maintenance allowance as directed by his superior in the office on the allegation of the Respondents which is being deducted from his salary. In the aforesaid situation, the marriage having broken down the Plaintiff has filed the suit for divorce.

The Defendant contested the proceeding by filing written statement denying the allegations. The Defendant also alleged that the Plaintiff is addicted to alcohol and when he gets intoxicated he used to torture her without any reason. Though the Defendant tried to adjust with the Plaintiff, he was found to be illicitly involved with another girl, viz., Riku Bhadur who had been kept as maid servant in the house, and the Defendant having protested against such extra marital affairs with Rinku Bahadur she was beaten by the Plaintiff. It is further stated that the Plaintiff not having paid any maintenance allowance she approached the Superintendent of Police praying for exercising his good office to that effect and accordingly at his instance Rs. 1,000 is being deducted from his salary and is paid to her as maintenance allowance.

4. Based on the pleadings of the parties, the learned trial judge framed the following issues:

(1) Is there any cause of action for the present case?

(2) Whether the Respondent treated the Petitioner and his daughters with cruelty?

(3) Whether the Petitioner is entitled to get the decree as prayed for?

(4) What are the relief or reliefs the parties are entitled to get?

5. During the course of trial the Plaintiff apart from examining himself as PW1, also took assistance of three other witnesses in support of her case, who was duly cross-examined by the Defendant. On the other hand, the Defendant examined herself as DW1 and also examined one more witness in support of her case. The learned trial court upon ap