IMPORTANT POINT
Net pay of husband Rs. 39367/-,taking into account in 1/4th of net pay of husband as entitlement of wife towards her maintenance, it comes to Rs. 10000/- per month.

S.K.Sahoo, J.— “A happy marriage doesn’t mean you have a perfect spouse or a perfect marriage. It simply means you’ve chosen to look beyond the imperfections in both.”

-Fawn Weaver

This appeal has been filed by the appellant-husband against the judgment and order dated 28.9.2007 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in Civil Proceeding No. 852 of 2006 in dismissing the divorce petition filed by him.

2. The appellant filed a Divorce Proceeding against respondent- wife on the ground of desertion and cruelty. It is the case of the appellant that some days after the marriage, the respondent started quarrelling with him and persuaded him to live separately from the joint family. To satisfy the respondent and to keep the family peace, the appellant shifted to the quarters in Sector-1 at Rourkela and stayed there with the respondent. The respondent insisted the appellant to bear the expenses of her parental house, the study expenses of her brother and also the treatment expenses of her mother. Though the appellant satisfied the demand of the respondent to some extent but when all the demands could not be fulfilled, the respondent picked up quarrel with the appellant. She was not performing the household works and staying at her parental house for most of the time and keeping away herself from the society of the appellant. The appellant tolerated the disturbance created by the respondent. Both of them were blessed with a female child in April, 1991 but the respondent did not change her attitude and she was keeping the child away from the appellant and was very cruel towards the friends and relatives of the appellant. The respondent also refused to keep sexual relationship with the appellant. It is further case of the appellant that on 6.3.1994, the respondent went away to her parental house taking some valuable gold ornaments, articles and cash along with the infant daughter during the absence of the appellant. The appellant attempted a lot to bring back the respondent to his company but failed.

The appellant filed a divorce proceeding under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, which was registered as O.S. No.2 of 1995 and the-same was dismissed being not maintainable on 14.3.1995. He filed another divorce petition bearing O.S. No.13 of 1996, which was’ withdrawn on 22.4.1996 with a permission to file fresh suit. In the meantime the respondent left Rourkela and went to her native village at Puri. The appellant then filed another divorce petition vide C.P. No. 182 of 1996.

As the respondent did not contest in that proceeding, she was set ex parte and the marriage between the parties was dissolved on 3.9.1996. The respondent filed Misc. Case No. 138 of 1998 under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside the ex parte order, which was allowed and the case was posted for hearing. The respondent filed a writ application before this Court vide OJC No. 11635 of 1995 to quash the entire proceeding pending before the Family Court but this Court directed to expedite the disposal of the divorce petition. Thereafter, the divorce petition was dismissed for default on 6.11.2002. There was’ a direction to the appellant to pay maintenance to respondent and their daughter and in that connection, Execution Case No.15 of 1997 was filed by the respondent. The respondent filed a criminal case against the appellant which corresponds to G.R Case No. 1461 of 1997 in the Court of learned SDJM, Rourkela.

3. The respondent filed her written statement denying the averments made by the appellant in the divorce petition and contended that they shifted to Sector-1 house at Rourkela as there was only one bed room in the house of the appellant at Uditnagar and there were five members in the family for which it was not convenient for all of them to stay together. She further stated that there was good relationship between her and the appellant and the girl child was born on 10th April, 1991. It is the further case of the respondent that she discovered some love let