Ram Chander v. Ananta

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ...

FAT/1/2021 Ram Chander Vs.

Ananta Ms. Anjili Nag ... for the appellant Mr. KMB Jayapal ... for the respondent August 24, 2023 (SR) Item No.6 We have heard the respective parties separately and thereafter jointly in chamber on 18th August, 2023. The parties sought time for further deliberation. Today, learned advocate representing the respondent wife submits that his client is not interested in any mutual settlement and the matter may be heard and decided on merits.

The Court has heard the learned advocates representing the respective parties at length and has perused the materials on record.

It appears that repeated attempts for settlement of the disputes amongst the parties and consistent efforts for reconciliation have failed. The parties are living separately for nearly eighteen years by now. The son of the parties, who has presently attained majority, is all along residing with the husband.

While speaking to the parties we noticed that there is absolutely not scope for a patch up. There is neither any emotional attachment nor financial dependency upon each other. None has any feeling for the other. Both the parties are working and have a fair amount of income. The wife has categorically submitted that she is not agreeable to accept even a single penny from her husband.

Though the wife submits that she is interested to live with her husband but at the time of interaction in the chamber, we have noticed that the parties were not even looking eye to eye with each other. None could tolerate the presence of the other. Both cast aspersions and levelled several allegations against each other. Apart from a formal submission that she was willing to live with her husband, there does not appear any genuine effort to actually do so. The wife appears to be reeling under a misconception that the husband and the son will, at one point of time, return to her. The wife is also holding an impression that if the husband is successful in obtaining an order of divorce, then she would lose the legal battle which is continuing from the year 2005.

The wife intends to prolong the legal tussle and does not want to relieve the husband from the marital tie. The wife has taken the litigation as a game/competition and is hell bent to win the same under any cost. In the course of discussion with the parties, it appears that neither the husband and nor the son can accept the wife/mother.

his wife in the house may be a matter of concern to him and his son and any untoward incident may happen anytime. In such situation, passing a judgment in the matter only on the legal points will be an empty formality. The marriage has broken down irretrievably and prolonging the matter further will amount to cruelty, harassment and pain to both the parties. When the parties have lost their reasoning to stay together no legal discourse can save the marriage.

The only option left to the Court at this stage is to break the marriage in the interest of justice and to prevent any further injustice to the parties and their son. In view of the above, we think it proper to sever the marital tie and dispose the pending appeal.

The marriage of the parties held on 2nd March, 1994 accordingly stands dissolved on and from today (24-082023). The impugned judgment and decree dated 11th January, 2021 passed in Mat. Suit No. 77 of 2021 (Ramchander vs. Smt Ananta) are set aside. The appeal stands disposed of.

Let decree of divorce be drawn up expeditiously. Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.

( Amrita Sinha, J. ) ( Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.)