Both husband and wife duty-bound to create congenial family atmosphere: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court on Friday said it is the collective duty of the husband and wife to create a congenial atmosphere for the couple to live peacefully and that it is unacceptable to put the husband on a higher pedestal than a wife [Dipanwita Das vs Moloy Das]..A division bench of Justices Harish Tandon and Madhuresh Prasad took exception to the observation of a family court that in a happy marriage, the wife provides the 'climate' and the husband provides the 'landscape'. "This observation is an archaic notion which has gradually eroded with the advancement of society in all respect. The two persons grown up and raised in a different atmosphere have a reciprocal and or collective duty to create a congenial atmosphere which cannot be said to be a one way traffic," the bench said in its order.The bench further said it was the collective duty of both husband and wife to wither the trivial issues which are normal in a matrimonial life."Even the Constitution of India recognises equality in gender and therefore, the husband to be put on higher degree than that of the wife is unacceptable," the bench underlined.The family court appeared to be swayed by the emotions and inappropriate appreciation of the facts, the High Court said."Therefore, we could not persuade ourselves to agree with the findings made in the impugned judgment, which is thus, set aside. The application for solution of marriage (filed by husband) is dismissed while the application for restitution of conjugal rights (filed by wife) is allowed," the Court ordered. .As per the facts of the case, the husband alleged that his wife subjected him to cruelty by abusing him, beating him and his mother and also by filing false cases against him and his family. The wife on the other hand contested the claims of the husband and contended that it was she who was subjected to mental cruelty by the husband and his family. The Court in its order discussed the manner in which the family court appreciated the evidence on record. It noted that the family court gave findings against the wife only because she had initially filed a plea for dissolution of the marriage, just like her husband, but had later filed a plea for restitution of conjugal rights. The High Court said that by giving such findings merely on the basis that the wife didn't initially file for restitution of conjugal rights, was incorrect. It also found that the findings of the family court that the wife subjected her in-laws and husband to cruelty by filing a case against them, was incorrect as the wife had only filed a complaint with regard to the husband leaving the matrimonial house. The bench noted that there were no arrests in the said complaint and the same would not amount to cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act. .Advocates Sabyasachi Chatterjee, Dyutiman Banerjee, Sandipan Das, Subhrajit Saha, Anindita Chatterjee, Badrul Karim, Kiron Sk, Sanajit Roy and Saumava Ganguly appeared for the wife. Advocate Swagata Dutta represented the husband..[Read Judgment]