SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Mad) 531

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R.BANUMATHI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
S. Valli
versus
N. Rajendran
C.M.A. NO.3352 OF 2004
Decided on: 12-02-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :D. Nagasaila for S. Tamizharasi, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Sheila Jayaprakash, Advocate.

Headnote:A. HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 13-

       Marriage solemnized on 29-08-1999 - Child born on 29-08-2000 - Appellant’s father died on 03-02-2001 - Divorce filed on 05-03-2001 - Facts held proved haste with while divorce petition was filed - Fact of petitions to divorce filed by both brother and sister on same day, showed that they were due to stained relationship between appellants brother and her sister in law - Such a kind of relationship cannot be a ground for divorce on cruelty (Para 29).

       B. HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 13-

       Mental cruelty - In order to consider mental cruelty, social status of parties their customs and traditional level and environment lived in are to be looked into - Court will have to draw inference and decide on the basis of probabilities of case regarding effect on the mind of spouse - 2002 (2) SCC 296 and 2005 (2) SC 22, relied on (Para 26).

       C. HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 15 -

       Respondent remarrying after divorce and before disposal of appeal - Validity - HELD, when time for appealing has expired or when appeal was preferred but dismissed then only it would be lawful for party to remarry - Applying Section 15, when appeal was presented on 09-092004 time had not expired - When remarriage was conducted on 30-10-2004, appeal was already presented on 09-09-2004 - What section contemplates is presentation of appeal When the appeal is filed, same would amount to presentation of appeal - Hence 2nd Marriage is perse illegal and unauthorized (Para 32).

       Result : CMA Allowed.

Judgment :-

M.M.SUNDRESH, J

1. This appeal has been filed by the wife challenging the decree granted on the file of I Additional Family Court, for divorce in favour of the husband under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

2. The brief facts of the case in a nutshell are as follows:

i. The appellant and the respondent are wife and husband. The marriage was solemnised as per the Hindu Rites and Custom on 29.08.1999 at Ananda Kalyana Mandapam, Chrompet, Chennai. The marriage was an arranged marriage between the parties. Prior to the marriage between the appellant and the respondent, the marriage between the appellants brother and the respondents sister was also solemnised on 24.05.1999. After the marriage the appellant became pregnant and went to her parents home.

ii. Thereafter a male child was born between the parties on 29.08.2000. Alleging that the appellant has left the matrimonial home on her own will and thereafter refused to come back from her parental home, the respondent filed the petition for divorce under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriages Act, 1955 on the ground of cruelty which was caused by the desertion of the appellant in view of her objections about the presence of her sister-in-law in her matrimonial home.

iii. It is the case of the respondent who was the petitioner in O.P.No.326 of 2001 which was filed for divorce on the ground of mental cruelty that the appellant had a disliking for the respondents sister. It is further stated that the appellant was instrumental for the problems of the petitioners sister. The appellant used to go to her parents house situated in the same city even without informing the respondent. When the respondent questioned the appellant she used to threaten him stating that she would commit suicide and implicate him and his parents.

.iv. It is further stated that on 03.01.2000 the respondents sister came to his house, since she was ill-treated by the brother of the appellant and her family. On 18.01.2000, the appellant picked up a quarrel with the respondent and took her belongings with her. Thereafter she did not visit the matrimonial home and she was eight weeks pregnant at that point of time. A male child was born on 29.08.2000. The respondent visited the appellant at the hospital but he was not treated well. Neither the appellant nor his family members were invited for the ceremonies conducted on the first year of the child. The above said actions of the appellant would amount to mental cruelty and hence he has filed the petition for divorce.

.v. A counter affidavit and written submissions were filed on behalf of the appellant stating that she never left her matrimonial home on her own but she was brought to her parents house by her father-in-law for delivering the child. It is not true to state that she created trouble for sister-in-law and if that is the case she would not have married the respondent. Therefore there was no misunderstanding between them. The present petition was filed in view of the petition filed by the sister of the respondent in O.P.No.337 of 2001. She never went to her parents home on her own accord and she only went to the said home on 13.09.1999 during Vinayagar Chathurthi, on 25.09.1999 with her father-in-law to see her sister-in-law, on 010. 1999 with her husband while she was pregnant for taking rest and 011. 1999 for Deepavali festival. In fact during the absence of the respondent his mother once locked the door and refused to allow her inside. The issue was kept quite at the request of the respondent. The appellant has never quarrelled with the respondent. The respondent has never visited the appellant and the child after child birth.

vi. It is further stated that only on 19.01.2000 she went to her parents home, since she was suffering from morning sickness to take care of her health. Only on her in-laws she was taken to her parents home by her brother with consent. She never picked up any quarrel on 19.01.2000 and took her bel



























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top