Mutual consent for divorce, along with agreed terms of alimony, is sufficient for dissolution under the Hindu Marriage Act, provided both parties are in agreement.

JUDGMENT

T. Amarnath Gond, J. - This is an appeal filed under Section 28 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 read with Section 19 of the Family Courts' Act, 1984 against the judgment and decree dated 08.03.2021 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, West Tripura, Agartala in case No.T.S. (Divorce) 385 of 2018, dismissing the divorce petition filed by the appellant.

2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the marriage between the appellant, Sri Pijush Kanti Das was solemnized with the respondent Smt. Priyanka Rani Das on 18.02.2011, as per Hindu rites and customs after observing all formalities of Hindu marriage in the house of the father of the respondent at Madhya Laxmibil. After marriage, both the appellant and the respondent started living together as husband and wife, and from their wedlock, a son was born on 05.01.2012. It is alleged that after some days of marriage, the appellant-husband noticed that the respondent-wife started to frequent visit her parental home without any permission of her parents-in-law. Knowing from his parents, after inquiry, he tried to convince the respondent but she started a quarrel with the appellant and told him that he is not the man of her choice and before marriage she was engaged with somebody. She also told that she is not interested to live with the petitioner as husband and wife. She also stopped doing her household work. It is further alleged that the respondent also pressurized him to leave his parents and stay in her parent's house as 'gharjamai' otherwise she would not be able to continue her marital life with him. One day while the appellant was on his duty at Agartala, his father-in-law came to his residential home at Ramcheera and without the consent of his parents took the respondent and her son to his house at Madhya Laxmibil and kept her in that house without any information to the appellant and his family members. Hearing this, the appellant rushed to his in-laws' house and requested her to come back but the respondent alleging some false allegations against him refused to come back to her matrimonial home. But somehow, the appellant convinced her and brought back her to her matrimonial home. It is further alleged that on 30.09.2012 while the appellant was on his duty he came to know over the telephone from his father that the respondent consumed poison and she was brought to the Bishalgarh PHC by his parents and subsequently brought to B.R. Ambedkar Hospital, Hapania from Bishalgarh PHC for better treatment. On the following day on 01.10.2012, the father of the respondent lodged an FIR to Bishalarh P.S., against the appellant and his old-aged parents. The FIR was registered as Bishalgarh P.S. Case No.207/2012 under Section 498A/34 of IPC. After that FIR, the petitioner and his mother Smt. Jiban Rani Das was arrested and they were in custody for a long time and subsequently released on bail. His father was released on anticipatory bail. After completion of the trial, the appellant and his parents were acquitted by the learned Session Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, vide judgment dated 18.07.2018.

3. It is further submitted by the appellant that on 27.11.2012, the respondent filed an application under Section 125(1) of Cr.P.C. against the appellant before the learned Judge, Family Court, West Tripura, Agartala for grant of monthly maintenance. The learned Court was pleased enough to grant Rs.3,000/- as monthly maintenance in favour of the respondent. Subsequently, in the year 2014, the respondent filed a case vide Misc. 440 of 2014 for enhancement of the maintenance allowance which was ac