The court confirmed that a marriage can be dissolved on mutual consent when irretrievably broken down, addressing the maintenance rights of the parties collectively.

1. Heard Mr. B. Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the appellant - husband. Also heard Mr. HK Bhowmik, learned counsel appearing for the respondent - wife.

2. This appeal under S.19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been preferred by the appellant - husband challenging the legality and validity of the judgment dated 30.05.2023 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Kailasahar, Unakoti, Tripura, in case no. Title Suit (RCR) 11 of 2021 whereby and whereunder the suit filed by the appellant - husband for restitution of his conjugal rights has been dismissed.

3. The facts in brief, are that, the marriage of the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 19.05.2014 according to Hindu rites and customs and on solemnization of their marriage they started to lead their conjugal life in the house of the appellant. At the time of marriage, the appellant was serving as Group 'D' employee under 13th Bn. TSR and posted at Kanchanpur, North Tripura. After a few months of the marriage, respondent left her matrimonial home and started to reside in her paternal residence with the consent of the appellant, but, after elapse of 15-20 days, the respondent expressed her unwillingness to return to her matrimonial home. Despite several requests of the appellant, the respondent did not return to her matrimonial home. Finding no other alternative, the appellant used to visit the paternal home of the respondent, and out of their wedlock one female child was born. In the year 2016 when the uncle of the respondent was involved in a murder case, then to avoid police interrogation, the respondent started to live in her matrimonial home, but after completion of police investigation, she again left her matrimonial home and started to reside in her paternal house.
3.1. Subsequently, in the year 2018, the respondent filed a petition before the learned Judge, Family Court, Kailasahar claiming monthly maintenance for herself and for her daughter and the said case was registered as Crl. Misc. (125) 80 of 2018. The petitioner i.e. the appellant herein after receipt of notice appeared before the learned court and the learned court below directed him to pay maintenance allowance @Rs.6, 500/- per month to the respondent and her daughter and, accordingly, the said case was disposed of on compromise, and thereby the appellant had been paying Rs.6, 500/- per month to the respondent as maintenance allowance.
3.2. Thereafter, the appellant being petitioner filed a petition under S.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned Judge, Family Court, Kailasahar, for restitution of his conjugal rights and the same was registered as T.S. (RCR) 11 of 2021. In the said petition, the appellant contended that the respondent without any reasonable excuse withdrew herself from his society and on the other hand the respondent by filing written statement denied the allegations made by the appellant herein and asserted that she was subjected to mental and physical torture on demand of dowry.
3.3. Upon hearing both sides, the learned trial court had dismissed the suit filed by the appellant. Thereafter, the respondent filed a petition for enhancement of the maintenance amount before the learned trial court and the same was registered as Crl.Misc (127) 04 of 2021. Upon hearing, learned trial court allowed the said petition enhancing the monthly maintenance at Rs.12, 000/- per month. Being aggrieved, the appellant had approached this court.

4. On 18.04.2024, when the matter was taken up for hearing, this court had interacted with both the appellant and the respondent, who were present in - person before this court w