Orissa High Court
Pratap Kumar Mahalik vs Manasi Sahu on 21 March, 2025
Bench: B.P. Routray, Chittaranjan Dash
Corrected
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MATA No. 377 of 2023
Pratap Kumar Mahalik .... Appellant
-versus-
Manasi Sahu .... Respondent
Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-
For Appellant : Mr. P.K. Mishra, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. R. Patnaik, Advocate
CORAM: JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY
JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
JUDGMENT
21st March, 2025
By The Bench.
1. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.
2. Both parties are present in person along with their respective
counsels. On being asked, the husband refused to take his wife back
to the matrimony so also the daughter on various pleas.
3. Admittedly, out of the two minor daughters begotten to the
couple, the elder one is residing with the husband and the younger
daughter is residing with the mother.
4. The personal appearance of both the parties is dispensed with.
5. Present Appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of
the learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur passed in C.P. No.180 of
2017, wherein, the prayer of the husband for grant of decree of
divorce has been refused. The husband has filed the Civil
Proceeding praying for dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)
of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of cruelty and desertion.
6. We have perused the evidence adduced on behalf of both the
parties. The husband examined three witnesses on his behalf, while
the wife examined three witnesses in support of her claim. It is
observed that the counter allegations made on behalf of the wife to
the effect that she met with violence found more empathetic than the
allegations of the husband against his wife. The allegations brought
out from the evidence of the wife-Respondent that the husband is
having relationship with another girl has been believed by the
learned trial court and we are not in disagreement with the
observations made by the learned trial court and find the allegations
believable on the principle of preponderance of probability. The
allegation of the husband to the effect that the wife is pursuing him
to reside separately is not substantiated. His further allegations that
the wife withheld from sexual associations with him is also found
unsubstantiated. The wife as R.W.1 has successfully rebutted the
allegations made against her with regard to cruelty and disertion.
7. Cruelty in matrimonial proceeding has been explained
time and again in various decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court,
such as, in the matters of V. Bhagat vs. D. Bhagat, reported in
(1994) 1 SCC 337 and Samar Ghosh vs. Jaya Ghosh, reported in
[2007] 4 S.C.R. 428
8. Coming to the case in hand, as stated above, the allegations
leveled by the husband against the wife is found unsubstantiated and
conversely, the counter allegations brought by the wife against her
husband is substantiated. Despite the above her willingness to stay
with the husband shows her inclination for reunion of the sacred
marriage which is bluntly refused by the husband.
9. In the circumstances, taking note of all such facts and evidences
brought on record, we do not find any support to the allegations of
cruelty or desertion made by the husband against his wife to
dissolve the marriage. Accordingly, there is no flaw in the impugned
judgment of learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur in refusing grant of
decree of divorce.
10. Accordingly, we confirm the impugned judgment. The Appeal
is dismissed being devoid of merit.
(B.P. Routray)
Judge
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Judge
Bijay/Sarbani
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
