1

IN THE COURT OF THE LD. DISTRICT JUDGE AT

ALIPORE
MAT SUIT NO. ______________ OF 2022

IN THE MATTER OF:

SRI. UTPAL MONDAL,

Son of Sri Ashim Mondal, Aged About –
42 years, residing at - Village :
Baikunthapur, P.O. - Dakshin
Gobindapur, Police Station: Baruipur,
South 24 Paraganas, Pin – 700145,
Presently Residing at - B-19,
Bansdroni, Bandipur Road Near
Vedanta Ashram, Mistri Para, P.O.
Bansdroni, P.S. Regent Park, Kolkata
700070, Mob : 9007522567
……. PETITIONER
-VS-

SMT. TANUSHREE MONDAL,

Wife of Utpal Mondal, daughter of
Ramdhan Dey, Aged About - 38 Years,
Residing at – Village : Bearuli, P.O -
Dakshin Gobindapur, Police Station -
Sonarpur, South 24 Paragans, West
Bengal, Pin -7000145
……. RESPONDENT

PETITION FOR DIVORCE UNDER SECTION 27 (1)(b)(d)

& (e) OF SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT, 1954, AS
AMENDED UPTO DATE
 2

The humble petition on behalf of the

petitioner above named:-
Most Respectfully Sheweth -
1. That the Petitioner is the husband of the Respondent/ Wife. The
marriage between parties was registered on 26th of MAY, 2003
according to the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
Copy of Marriage Registration Certificate is attached
herewith as Annexure P1.
2. That pursuant to norms of the society and customs, social
marriage ceremony was conducted on 8th December, 2005.
3. That out of the wedlock, a boy child, named as Ujan Mondal,
aged about 13 years and a girl child, named as Ujjaini Mondal,
aged about 6 years were born.
4. That your Petitioner came into the association of the Respondent
through his Sister, Mousumi Das, who was her friend. It is
pertinent to mention here that your Respondent was the first one
to extend proposal of courtship through letter to the Petitioner.
5. That Your Petitioner being a benevolent and rational person
resolved to involve the parents of both the parties if he is to
accept the proposal of Your Respondent since he had no intention
of engaging into courtship with her without a nod from the elders
of both the families or take undue advantage of her.
6. That after the discussion with parents of both your Petitioner and
your Respondent, they agreed to the registration of marriage for
the time being since at that time the Respondent just took an
admission into college and did not complete her graduation and
the petitioner being a rational person wished for the Your
Respondent to complete her graduation. Your Respondent
 3

continued residing in her father’s home after registration of

marriage.
7. That despite the resistance of the petitioner, the family of your
Respondent pressurized your Petitioner to agree to Social
marriage ceremony as the parents of the Respondent intended to
socially marry off their daughter at the earliest though being well
conversant with the fact that neither their daughter i.e. the
Respondent had completed her graduation level nor their son- in
law was well established financially.
8. That though your Petitioner pleaded with the Parents of your
Respondent to allow him some more time to get established
financially before stepping into conjugal life with the Respondent
in a full-fledged manner. Subsequently on 8th December, 2005,
the social marriage ceremony between the Petitioner and the
Respondent was conducted at the residence of Respondent and
by that time the Respondent could not completed her graduation.
9. That thereafter entering into conjugal life, Your Petitioner
observed many behavioural changes in the Respondent. She
seemed to be detached from her marital life and absorbed into
her own sweet world.
10. That the Respondent who exhibited emotion towards the
Petitioner before marriage, to the disbelief of the Petitioner,
exhibited a complete departure from her emotion and your
Respondent had turned into an excessively materialistic person
who was only after expensive items.
11. That your Respondent started making skyrocketing demands
from your Petitioner for maintaining her sybaritic lifestyle which
were difficult to be met by the Petitioner as his only source of
income was through his farming occupation which were enough
 4

to provide a decent lifestyle but not to match up to extravagant

lifestyle.
12. That Your petitioner was under constant duress due to the
unrealistic demands of your Respondent as she intended to
squander those hard earned moneys of your Petitioner at the
back of Shopping, visiting high-end salons, restaurants, buying
high end cosmetic products failing which your Respondent would
raise hue and cry in the family and hurl cusswords at your
Petitioner.
13. That your Petitioner hoped that with an addition to the family, as
in with birth of a child, all of these conflicts and slew of demands
would cease and as a result on 8th December, 2008, the couple
was blessed with a boy child.
14. That to the dismay of your Petitioner there weren’t any cessation
of erratic behavior on the part your Respondent rather it turned
from bad to worse as now she turned into an aggressive person
who would arbitrarily beat her child without any reason and hurl
invective languages at her parents–in-law and brutalize her
husband by playing a havoc with his mental peace at home.
15. That pursuant to dutiful wife, the duties comprises of taking care
of her household, tending to her husband, children,
parents-in-law, and discharge all the marital obligation which a
married women is expected to discharge while dwelling in
nuptial ties however your Respondent evinced a complete
dereliction of duty of a responsible wife as she failed to empathize
with her husband though acquainted with the fact the her
husband i.e. the Petitioner has humble income, your respondent
would oppress him mentally for providing unlimited money to
her.
 5

16. That on several occasion, the Respondent was caught by your

Petitioner speaking to several men over phone. On questioning
her link and what purpose she does have with those men, your
Respondent would behave in a hostile manner with your
Petitioner.
17. That Your Respondent had no interest in her marital life with
your Petitioner which is evident from the fact that she would
neither cook meal for the family nor for herself nor permit the
other family members to enter the kitchen and prepare meals for
themselves. Your Respondent had an evil intention of making
family members hunger starved while she ordered for herself
from outside and gobble it locking up herself in her room. not
allowing anyone into her room, not even her own son. That was
her unique method of oppressing her family members husband
and in laws in her matrimonial house.
18. That on frivolous matters Your Respondent would badmouth her
aged mother in law insult and disgraced her father in law,
thrashed them. The mother and father of the petitioner both are
ailing. The mother is a cardiac patient while father has high blood
pressure despite that they had to endure such turbulence at
home.
19. That is order to fulfill Your Respondent’s insatiable demands, she
would go out of her home with gold jewelleries or utensils made of
metal having high value in the market and sell them or pawn
them to merchant shops in exchange of money. She also would
take out money from Locker kept for sustaining livelihood
without informing Your Petitioner. From time to time even for
doing every iota of domestic chores, your Respondent would
demand money from Your Petitioner.
 6

20. That it is pertinent to mention here that gold jewellery not only
included Stridhan jewelry but also included the gold jewelleries
like finger rings, chain given to Your Petitioner as a gift on
marriage also your Respondent sold the gold ring given their son,
Ujjal Mondal by the family of Petitioner on his six months’ old
ceremony or first rice eating ceremony of a child (MUKHE
BHAAT).
21. That when Your Respondent conceived for the second time, Your
Petitioner shouldered the responsibility of a doting and
affectionate husband and tended to her while she was carrying
the baby in her womb. Your Respondent was addicted to ill habits
like consumption of Pan Masala, Betel Quid and all other
harmful edible substances which would have proven detrimental
to the fetus in the womb. Hence Your Petitioner lovingly would
convince her not to indulge in the consumption of harmful; edible
substances however your Respondent turned a deaf ear to
Petitioner’s advice and request.
22. That it is pertinent to mention here that even before marriage,
your Respondent was addicted to these ill habits and even after
marriage during any auspicious occasion or festivities, she would
indulge in consumption of alcohol and turn inebriated and the
situation used to be tackled by Your Petitioner.
23. That subsequently after the birth of second child, a girl child, on
28th January 2017, Your Respondent’s temper was at its zenith
for unknown reasons. Your Respondent was unable to withstand
the Petitioner any longer in front of her eyes and started
pressuring Your petitioner to free her from marital ties by
divorcing her as your Respondent didn’t want to reside with her
husband (Petitioner) her Children and her Parents-in-law under
same roof and failing which your Respondent threatened to file
 7

case of 498A of IPC against the petitioner and mudsling him in

the society.
24. That after being extremely vexed and exasperated by the boorish
conduct of Your Respondent, Your Petitioner thought of confiding
in his sister, Mousumi Das and her husband Subhas Das. They
came down for a mediation between the Petitioner and the
Respondent but your Petitioner was left aghast when he
witnessed Your Respondent marching towards them wrathfully
with an intention to bash them up. Since then Your Petitioner’s
Sister and husband discontinued visiting Your Petitioner’s place.
25. That Your Respondent left no stone unturned to downgrade and
tarnish the reputation of Your Petitioner by badmouthing him,
mudslinging him, vociferating and creating a ruckus in the
house, the topic which became a talk of the neighbourhood.
26. That the boorishness of Your Respondent knew no limits as
became extremely badmouthed, aggressive, ill mannered, short
tempered and cantankerous woman who would even abuse her
guests or relatives at home which lowered the head of Your
Petitioner in shame.
27. That the misconduct and brash nature of the Respondent was
reported to the mother in law of your Petitioner as well as his
brother in law. However, no initiative was taken by them to
reprimand Your Respondent to make her mend her ways.
28. That Your Respondent not only showed dereliction of duty of a
wife but also dereliction of duty towards her children as she
shirked her responsibilities towards her children in every aspect
as she would herself wake up from sleep late leave alone waking
up her kids for school. On the contrary, Your Petitioner though
being engaged in farming work, would hasten to finish his work
 8

on time in the morning so that he can get his kids ready for
school.
29. That on one such occasion Your Respondent was speaking to
person over phone for long hours, named as Sourav, residing at
Salt lake which came to the notice of Your Petitioner who on
questioning her link with him or what she does have to do with
him, Sourav, Your Respondent began to fulminate and turned
extremely violent and fiendish and assaulted Your Petitioner
ruthlessly, thrashed, scratched his chest, left forearm, armpit
mercilessly and when Your Petitioner’s parents tried to intervene
in order to save their son, even they faced the wrath of Your
Respondent and were assaulted mercilessly too.
Copy of Medical report of injury is attached herewith
Annexure - P2.
30. That incident was reported to Baruipur Police station on 17th
May, 2018 soon after.

Copy of GD 1. is attached herewith Annexure- P3.

31. That following the report to the police station, your Respondent
fled her matrimonial house leaving behind her two kids which is
a conclusive proof she has always been negligent towards her
children and went to her father’s house.
32. That report to the police station ensued the matter to be heard
by the Langalberia Gram Panchayat. Notice of Arbitration by
Panchayat was issued to both Your Petitioner and father of Your
Respondent on 18th November, 2019 to be decided upon on 21st
November,2019.
33. That when Notice of Arbitration from Gram Panchayat was
received, the brother and father of Your Respondent barged into
 9

the house of Your Petitioner, slapped him hard and created

ruckus therein. Your Petitioner reported the incident to the police
station of Sonarpur on Novemember 2019, against the brother
and father of Your Respondent.
Copy of GD 2. is attached herewith Annexure- P4.
34. That Gram Panchayat concluded on 21st November, 2019, after
much analysis and research that Your Respondent has mental or
psychopathic disorder due to which she was advised to undergo
treatment by a psychiatrist. Cost to be borne jointly.
Copy of Notice of Mutual Settlement from Gram
Panchayat. is attached herewith Annexure- P5.
35. That despite the direction of Panchayat your Respondent
continued staying at her father’s home. Once she came back to
her matrimonial home on 15th December, 2019 only to take away
her refrigerator gifted to her by her father on marriage.
36. That your Respondent had a sudden change of mind and agreed
to come to her matrimonial house.
37. That the Respondent submitted a notarized undertaking on 12th
February, 2020 affirming that she returned to her matrimonial
home on 3rd February, 2020 and she would discharge the
responsibility of a dutiful wife and daughter –in –law and mother.
She would not treat her husband, children, parent-in-law with
cruelty.
38. That soon after that again the Respondent abandoned her
matrimonial home with all her belongings, jewelleries, clothes,
and accessories leaving behind her children.
39. That another complained was lodged with Baruipur P.S. on 27th
September, 2021 as the brother, his wife and father of the
Respondent came down to petitioner home to assault him.
 10

Copy of GD 3. is attached herewith Annexure- P6.

40. That Your Petitioner affirms that your Respondent is involved in
relationship outside her marriage corroborated from the
circumstantial fact that she had illicit affair with Paramour
named as Sourav which propelled her to create ruckus in her
matrimonial house and break free from marital ties.
41. That Your Petitioner contends that relief should be granted as per
Section 27 (1)(b) of Special Marriage Act 1954 specifies that a
petition for divorce may be presented to the district court either
by the husband or the wife on the ground that the Respondent
has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of not less
than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the
petition; It was held in case of Gopal V Mithilesh AIR 1979 MP 316
The court stated that an intention to abandon must be
established. To constitute desertion two ingredients must present
i.e. Fact of Separation (Factum deserdendi) and Intention to
desert (animus deserdendi). Your Petitioner has been deserted for
2 continuous years.
42. That Your Petitioner affirms that he has been deserted and your
Respondent has withdrawn from the society of Your Petitioner as
frequently she left her matrimonial home for days without
informing the Petitioner. She always had an intention to abandon
marital ties.
43. That Your Petitioner contends that relief should be granted as per
Section 27 (1) (d) of Special Marriage Act 1954 specifies that a
petition for divorce may be presented to the District Court either
by the husband or the wife on the ground that the Respondent
has since the solemnization of the marriage treated the petitioner
with cruelty. This case of Dastane v Dastane AIR 1975 SC 153
presents a high watermark case on mental cruelty. Mrs. Dastane
 11

used to make all sorts of vile, filthy and false allegations not
merely against the husband but also all the members of the
family. She vehemently abused him and swore to drag his entire
family to ashes. She rebuked him publicly and even tore off her
mangalsutra twice. This was a clear case of mental cruelty.
44. That Your Petitioner affirms that he was subjected to perpetual
physical, mental cruelty and it is evident from Medical Report
that he sustained deliberate injury to his body and abused and
cussed with filthy language day and right and Your Petitioner has
all reasonable apprehension of danger to his life and peace.
45. That Your Petitioner contends that relief should be granted as per
Section 27(1)(e) of Special Marriage Act 1954 specifies that a
petition for divorce may be presented to the district court either
by the husband or the wife on the ground that the Respondent
has been incurably of unsound mind, or has been suffering
continuously or intermittently from mental disorder of such a
kind and to such an extent that the petitioner cannot reasonably
be expected to live with the respondent.

46. That Your Petitioner affirms that Your Respondent is suffering

from mental disorder which is corroborated with the analysis and
findings of Gram Panchayat and under no circumstances a sane
man can reside with psychiatric patients as Your Petitioner has
to prioritize safety of is children staying with your Petitioner as it
is unpredictable and uncertain that mental patient (herein
referred to as Your Respondent) would not cause injury to his
children and to himself as well. Hence Your Petitioner has
reasonable apprehension of being attacked by the Your Petitioner
who isn’t a sane person.

47. That Your Petitioner seeks decree of divorce as marriage between

Your Petitioner and Your Respondent has broken down
irretrievably and the chances of restoring marital bond was
 12

beyond any probability as it is unthinkable to reside with a

woman having questionable character, badmouthed, barbaric,
hot headed, impudent, an addict who has turned Your
Petitioner’s life topsy- turvy who seems to have lost his peace of
mind as due to constant furor and agitation faced by him due to
the nefarious acts of Your Respondent, his life lay in shambles.
48. That Your Petitioner has not in any manner been accessory to or
connived at or condoned adultery.
49. That Your Petitioner has not in any manner condoned cruelty.
50. That petition is not presented in collusion with respondent.
51. The petition is being presented without any unnecessary or
improper delay.
52. There is no other legal ground as to why the decree prayed for
should not be granted in favour of the Petitioner.
53. The cause of action for the suit firstly arose on 26.05.2003 when
the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was
registered followed by their social marriage on 08.12.2005 and
on 03.02.2020, when the respondent left her matrimonial house,
the last place of residence of the spouses and is still continuing.
54. This Ld. Court has the jurisdiction to entertain and try this
petition as presently the petitioner is residing within the
jurisdiction of this Ld. Court.
In view of the above stated facts and
circumstances, it is humbly prayed that
Your Honour may graciously be pleased to
grant of decree of Divorce to the Petitioner
on the ground of desertion, cruelty,
mental disorder in favour of Petitioner and
against the Respondent; and that any
 13

other relief or reliefs which the court may

deem proper under the circumstances be
also awarded to the petitioner.
And your petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray

AFFIDAVIT
I, Utpal Mondal, s/o Ashim Mondal, aged about 42 years, Occupation:
farmer, residing at Village : Baikunthapur, P.O. Dakshin Gobindapur,
P.S. - Baruipur, South 24 Parganas, Pin – 7000145, presently residing
at - B-19, Bansdroni, Bandipur Road Near Vedanta Ashram, Mistri
Para, P.O. Bansdroni, P.S. - Regent Park, Kolkata - 700070, do hereby
solemnly affirm and state as follows:-

1. That I am the petitioner of this instant case and am thoroughly

conversant with the facts and circumstances of the suit.

2. That the statements made in paragraph No. 1 to 39 are true to my

knowledge and the rests are my respectfully submission before this
Ld. Court.

DEPONENT
Prepared in my office Known to me Identified by me

ADVOCATE ADVOCATE
14