2012 Supreme(Ker) 672
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.T. SANKARAN & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ,
Zainaba
Versus
T.A. Abdul Rasheed
Mat. Appeal Nos. 245 of 2008 & 896 of 2011
Decided on : 11-09-2012
For the Appellant:M.S. Imthiyaz Ahammed, Shiraz Abdulla, Jojo Pappachan, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Smt. Chincy Gopakumar, Advocate.
Headnote:A. Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, Sections 2(ii) and 2(ix) - Dissolution of marriage will be entitled to the wife if she is not getting maintenance from the husband-Wife living separately is also the ground for the dissolution of marriage.
Joseph Francis, J.
1. Mat. Appeal 896 of 2011 is filed by the respondent/husband in O.P.No.251 of 2010 on the file of the Family Court, Kasaragod. The respondent is the petitioner/wife in that Original Petition, which was filed by her under Section 7 (1)(a) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 and Section 2(ii), (viii)(a) and (d) and (ix) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 (for short, 'the Act'). Mat. Appeal No.245 of 2008 is filed by the respondent/wife in O.P.No.85 of 2007 on the file of the Family Court, Kasaragod. The respondent is the petitioner/husband in that Original Petition, which was filed by him for restitution of conjugal rights. Since the parties in both the appeals are the same and the questions involved are interconnected, the above appeals are disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The averments of the petitioner/wife in O.P.251 of 2010 are briefly as follows : The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 18.5.2003 as per the customs prevailing in the community. Nikah ceremony was performed on 18.5.2003 and the 'Veettukudal' function was conducted on 14.3.2004. No children are born in the wedlock. Prior to the marriage proposal, the respondent had contracted another marriage, which was divorced. No demand for dowry was made from the side of the respondent at the time of marriage proposal. The petitioner's father is a psychiatric patient. At the time of marriage, the petitioner had completed her First Year B.Com. degree course and was preparing for the Second Year. The petitioner accepted the marriage proposal on condition that she should be allowed to complete her higher studies. After the Nikah ceremony, the respondent and his family members insisted the petitioner to discontinue her studies. When the family members of the petitioner conveyed the information regarding discontinuance of her studies, the respondent insisted for payment of Rs.5,00,000/- and 200 sovereigns of gold ornaments as dowry. He also demanded a car, but the petitioner's parents were not in a position to purchase a car. With the help of the relatives, the parents of the petitioner gave 183 sovereigns of gold ornaments. After a few days of the marriage, the respondent and his family members started to ill-treat the petitioner demanding dowry of Rs.5,00,000/- and a car. Many of the gold ornaments were pledged by the respondent in his name. On 24.12.2004 the grandfather of the petitioner was hospitalized. Even though all the family members visited him in the hospital, the respondent did not take the petitioner to see her sinking grandfather. After two days, the grandfather died. The respondent threatened her while going to the hospital that if she disclosed to others the reason of her swelling on the face, she would be killed. On 27.11.2005 when the petitioner and the respondent were to attend the house-warming ceremony of one Mr. Navas and Arifa, the respondent pointed a revolver on the head of the petitioner. On 12.2.2007, the respondent took the petitioner to her house and left there. On 15.2.2007 at 2 p.m., the respondent came along with his family members and entered into the petitioner's room and asked for money. On 14.3.2007, the father of the respondent came to the house of the petitioner and asked them to forget all the past incidents. The Manjeshwar Police has registered Crime No.137/2007 against the respondent and his family members. The police filed charge sheet against the respondent and it is now pending before the C.J.M. Court, Kasaragod for the offence under Section 498A I.P.C. The Original Petition filed by the respondent seeking restitution of conjugal rights (O.P.No.85 of 2007) was decreed on 13.2.2008. The petitioner filed Mat. Appeal No.245 of 2008 against the said judgment. The respondent treated the petitioner with cruelty, both mental and physical. The respondent neglected her and failed to provide maintenance to her for the last more than two years continuously. There is a