The husband's claims of cruelty were insufficient to establish grounds for divorce, leading the court to grant judicial separation instead, recognizing the potential for reconciliation.

JUDGMENT

S.G.Chattopadhyay, J. - This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 05.01.2019 delivered by the District Judge, North Tripura Judicial District, Dharmanagar in Case No. T.S. (Divorce) 53 of 2017. The respondent('husband' hereunder) filed a petition in the court of District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar under Section 13(1)(i-a) & (i-b) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955( the Act of 1955' hereunder) against the appellant ('wife' hereunder) praying for dissolution of their marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The learned District Judge declined to grant decree of divorce in the suit. Instead, by the impugned judgment dated 05.01.2019 delivered by him in case no T.S.(Divorce) 53 of 2017, he passed a decree for judicial separation in exercise of his power under Section 13(a) of the Act of 1955. The aggrieved wife has, therefore, preferred this appeal under Section 28 of the Act of 1955 read with Section 19 of the FAMILY COURTS ACT , 1984 challenging the legality of the impugned judgment passed by the learned District Judge, Dharmanagar, North Tripura.

2. The undisputed facts are that both the husband and wife are Hindus and governed by the provisions of the Act of 1955. Their marriage was solemnized on 13.09.1993 as per Hindu rites and customs and a daughter and a son were born to them within their wed lock.

3. In the divorce proceedings, the husband brought several allegations of cruelty against his wife. According to him, they had love affairs which matured into their marriage. Since their family members did not accept their relationship, the marriage was solemnized in a temple called 'Mahadev Mandir' at Damcherra. After marriage, they started living together in the ancestral house of the husband at Damcherra where the husband was posted as a Panchayet Secretary in Dasda R.D.Block at that time. Within a few years, a daughter and a son were born to them. It was alleged by the husband that his wife could not tolerate his mother. She was always willing to live away from his mother and constantly pursuing her husband to take a house on rent elsewhere so that they could stay away from her mother-in-law. Since the husband did not agree to her proposal, she started ill treating his mother. She stopped cooking at home and started quarrelling with her husband on trivial issues. Even during midnight, she used to quarrel with her husband loudly. The irritated neighbours started agitating against them. As a result, the husband took a house on rent at Rajbari, Dharmanagar and started residing there with his wife and children. Gradually their relationship worsened and he parted with the company of his wife and started living separately at Kirtantali, Kailashahar in Unakoti. Having found no possibility of restoration of their conjugal life, the husband filed the petition in the Court of the District Judge seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion.

4. The wife contested the petition and refuted the allegations made against her by her husband. She brought counter allegations against her husband. According to her, all allegations brought by her husband were false and baseless. She alleged that her husband deserted her and her two children in a hapless condition in March, 2017 and he never came back. It was also alleged by the wife that after marriage, when she started living with her husband at Damcherra, her husband and her mother-in-law subjected her to harassment for dowry. Her husband demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- in cash and for the fulfilment of his