Advocates:
['GOUTAM KHETRAPAL', '', 'AVINASH CHAND SAHU', 'SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL L', 'VIJAY LAXMI SARWA', '', 'KRISHNA KUMAR DIXIT']

1

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

FAM No. 212 of 2017

Smt. Manisha Mishra W/o Shri Sandeep Mishra, Aged

About 20 Years R/o Hal Mukam Shriram Nagar, New

Changorabhata, In Front Of The Dhurv Cycle Stores,

Raipur Tahsil and District Raipur

Chhattisgarh

--- Appellant

Versus

Sandeep Mishra, S/o Shri Manharan Lal Mishra, Aged

About 30 Years R/o Village Kenekera, Mahadev Ghat,

Mahasamund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh,

Chhattisgarh

--- Respondent

For the appellant : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate.

For the Respondent : No one appears despite repeated calls

DB:

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri, Judge &

Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal, Judge

Judgement/order on Board

Per Goutam Bhaduri, J

06

.09.2022

Heard.

1. The present appeal is against the judgment and decree

dated 18.08.2017 passed by the Family Court, Raipur,

(C.G) whereby the application filed by the wife seeking

decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty was

dismissed.

2. The wife filed a petition for divorce on the ground that

she was married to respondent Sandeep Mishra on

29.06.2012. After the marriage, she joined the company

2

of husband and during subsistence of marital relations, a

child named Geetanshu Mishra was born. It was stated

that up-till 4 months after the marriage, the relations

between them were cordial but subsequently it was

noticed by her that husband was prone to heavy regular

consumption of alcohol and due to inebriation he was

not able to engage in any avocation. It was further

alleged that whenever, he was short of money to

procure liquor, he depends upon his parents and when

he did not get money, he used to pick quarrels and

assault the persons. As a result, the situation became

aggravated in a day to day affair. It is further pleaded

that the husband used to make baseless allegations on

the character of wife and was suspecting the fidelity of

the wife. It is also pleaded that quarrels and fighting

between the parties had become regular phenomena,

therefore, in between October 2012 and March 2013,

many a time, she left for maternal home but on

intervention/advice of elders, she again joined the

company of the husband. It is pleaded that despite the

efforts made by elders and relatives, the husband was

not ready to improve his behavior, therefore, it would

be difficult to restore harmony/cordial relations between

them. As such the appellant wife expressed her inability

to maintain the marital relations. It is stated that at last

she came back to her maternal home in the first week of

April, 2013 and since then she started living there. On

these grounds, the decree of divorce was sought for.

3. In reply, the defendant husband denied all the

3

allegations and stated that without any rhyme and

reason, the wife deserted the company of the husband.

It is further stated that he made several efforts to get

back the wife but she did not accede to his request and

without any sufficient cause started living continuously

at her parental home. Therefore, she is not entitled for

any relief.

4. The learned family Court framed the issue on the ground

of cruelty that whether the husband after the marriage

treated the wife with physical and mental cruelty. The

answer was given in negative. The Court held that the

wife is not entitled to get decree of divorce. The wife

examined herself as P.W.1 and Prahlad Sharma as P.W.2

whereas the husband examined himself as D.W.1, his

father Mr. Manharan Mishra as D.W.2 and one Dhani

Nishd as D.W.3

5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the

sole contention was that wife was being physically and

mentally subjected to cruelty by the husband after

consuming liquor regularly. He would submit that simply

consuming liquor may not amount to cruelty but when

th