Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2024.10.25 17:13:44 +0530 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FA(MAT) No. 102 of 2020 Judgment Reserved On: 18:10:2024 Judgment Delivered On: 25:10:2024 Smt. Utra Patel W/o Shri Teklal Patel Aged About 43 Years R/o Kotra Road, Rajiv Nagar District Raigarh Chhattisgarh, District :

Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus Teklal S/o Late Shri Chandulal Patel Aged About 52 Years R/o Kotra Road, Rajiv Nagar, Gali No. 1, In Front Of Sahu Tailor District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Tiwari, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Vineet Ku. Pandey, Advocate DB: Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey and Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal C A V Judgment Per Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred by the Appellant/wife under Section 19(1) of Family Courts Act, 1984, questioning the legality and propriety of judgment and decree dated 19.02.2020 passed by the Family Court, Raigarh, District Raigarh (CG) in Civil Suit No.51-A/2015, whereby the claim of the Respondent/husband seeking dissolution of marriage, has been allowed.

2. The case of the Respondent/husband before the Family Court was that they belong to Patel caste and the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 04.07.1991 according to Hindu rituals and customs in Raigarh (C.G.). Out of their wedlock, they have two children namely Sunanada Patel born in year 1994 and Onkar born in year 2002. The Respondent/husband at time of marriage was working on the post of Teacher in Higher Secondary Pandiripani, District Jashpur. For better educational opportunity to their children, they got their children admitted in the school at Raigarh. The husband was doing government job by staying alone at Pandiripani whereas the wife along with the children were living at Raigarh. It is alleged that after shifting to Raigarh, the behavior of the appellant/wife changed towards the respondent/husband which become a matter of concern for the Respondent. The appellant started demanding unnecessary money by quarreling over trivial matters and started using reproachful and slanderous words due to which the respondent had to face mental, physical and financial problem. In 2012, he was transferred at village Badedumarpali, Raigarh. Since then he is residing in his house with his family and used to go to school from there only. It is alleged that the Appellant used to force the Respondent to live separately from her in separate house. The Respondent, to resolve their family dispute, called the Appellant’s family members to his house but there was no change in the behaviour of the wife and she threatened to report to the police. The appellant even stopped providing him food at home and therefore, since February 2013, he has been eating outside at different hotels. He has not made physical relations with the Appellant for almost five years, and the Appellant always pressured him to spend his salary as per her will, while the Respondent incurred all expenses of the wife and children. The Appellant, who earns from stitching and knitting, does not contribute to the family expenses and continuously abused the Respondent with vulgar language. The application also mentions that when the respondent returned home in the evening the appellant would sometimes open the door for him, and sometimes she would not open the door. Despite the efforts of the Respondent and his relatives to counsel her, she threatened to either return to her parental home in Raigarh or sell the residential plot they purchased. The Appellant frequently threatens to falsely implicate the Respondent in cases that could result in police and court proceedings. There is neither any physical relation nor communication between them. Under these circumstances, the respondent/husband filed the application to dissolve the marriage between the parties and to grant decree of