TUMPA CHOWDHURY @ SAHA vs PARTHA SARATHI CHOWDHURY — 389/2024
Case under Hindu Marriage Act Section 13- 1-ia--ib. Disposed: Uncontested--OTHERWISE on 27th April 2026.
Matrimonial Suit
CNR: WBHG090010732024
Filing Number
464/2024
Filing Date
14-08-2024
Registration No
389/2024
Registration Date
14-08-2024
Court
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chandannagore, Hooghly
Judge
1-ADJ FTC
Decision Date
27th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--OTHERWISE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
TUMPA CHOWDHURY @ SAHA
Adv. SABYASACHI GHOSH
Respondent(s)
PARTHA SARATHI CHOWDHURY
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ADJ FTC
Disposed
Order
Order
Ex-parte Hearing
Written Statement
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | Order |
| 16-01-2026 | Order |
| 13-11-2025 | Ex-parte Hearing |
| 12-06-2025 | Written Statement |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Matrimonial Suit No. 389/2024 The Additional District Judge granted an ex-parte divorce decree to petitioner Tumpa Chowdhury against her husband Partha Sarathi Chowdhury under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. The court found the petitioner's unchallenged evidence of persistent mental cruelty credible—including caste-based abuse by in-laws, mental torture, a miscarriage caused by harassment, spousal indifference, and abandonment of conjugal duties—and concluded the respondent's failure to perform marital obligations itself constituted cruelty, warranting dissolution of the marriage solemnized in 2013. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Matrimonial Suit No. 389/2024 The Additional District Judge granted an ex-parte divorce decree to petitioner Tumpa Chowdhury against her husband Partha Sarathi Chowdhury under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. The court found the petitioner's unchallenged evidence of persistent mental cruelty credible—including caste-based abuse by in-laws, mental torture, a miscarriage caused by harassment, spousal indifference, and abandonment of conjugal duties—and concluded the respondent's failure to perform marital obligations itself constituted cruelty, warranting dissolution of the marriage solemnized in 2013. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts