A spouse can seek dissolution of marriage if the other spouse changes their religion.

The Order of the Court was as follows :

This is application filed by the petitioner under Ss. 10 and 43 of the Indian Divorce Act.

2. The petitioner's case is as follows :-

The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent took place on 10-1-1985 at C.S.I. Church, Virugambakkam in accordance with christian rites and customs. The marriage expenses were borne out by the petitioner's parants. At the time of marriage, the petitioner's parents gave 10 sovereigns of gold and a sum of Rs. 12,000/- to the respondent besides house-hold articles. From the date of marriage, the petitioner was ill-treated by the parents of the respondent. They compelled the petitioner to do all sorts of manual works. The petitioner was directed to wash the inner garments of the respondent's elder brother. She was not even permitted to view the television, listen to the radio and read newspapers. The respondent's parents demanded dowry and the parents of the petitioner expressed their inability to pay. The ill-treatment continued and the petitioner was not even permitted to have full meals. Therefore, the petitioner had to leave the matrimonial home on 27-12-1985. There was thus justifiable and acceptable cause for the petitioner to leave the matrimonial home. A male child was born to the petitioner out of the wedlock. The respondent did not care to see the child, nor took any steps to resume the matrimonial life and thus deserted her. An attempt was made in the beginning of the year 1988 for reconciliation, but the respondent refused. The respondent has subsequently converted to Islam and has married a Muslim woman. In such circumstances, the petitioner prays for an order of dissolution of marriage and for the relief that the petitioner should have the custody of the minor child.

3. The respondent contends as follows :-

The petition is not maintainable. It is true that the marriage took place on 10-1-1985. It is not true to say that the entire marriage expenses were borne out by the petitioners parents, but the expenses were equally shared by the petitioner's parents and the respondent's parents. The allegation that 10 sovereigns of jewels and a sum of Rs. 12,000/- were given is false. The respondent purchased the bridal dress. The respondent was not given a wedding suit. Whatever the jewels the petitioner had with her were taken away by her when she left the matrimonial home on 27-12-1985. She left the matrimonal home without the consent and knowledge of the respondent or his parents. When the respondent's mother was taking rest in her room, the petitioner silently walked out without informing her. At that time, she took away all the articles at home except almirah, iron cot and sewing machine, and those items of articles were given away in the course of proceedings in O.P. No. 645/92. It is not true to say that the petitioner was ill-treated and was made to do all kinds of manual work. The allegation that she was directed to wash the inner garments of the respondent's elder brother is mischievous. The other allegation that she was not even allowed to watch T.V., listen to the radio and read newspapers, is equally false. That she was not allowed to have meals regularly, is also a bold lie. Right from the date of marriage, the respondent found the petitioner very fussy arrogant and irritable. The respondent always behaved nicely. At the slightest pretext, she became irritable and found fault with the respondent, complained, scolded and abused him in filthy language. She became indifferent and neglected the respondent completely and failed to perform her conjugal duties. Even though there was a maid servant to do the house hold work, the petitioner expected the servant to do even those certain works which any person would do on his or her own. The petitioner was granted all freedom at home. She was provided with mazines to read. The respondent even suggested her to go to sewing school to learn sewing. The respondent's parents treated her like t