PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.

Happy is the man who finds a true friend, and far happier is he who finds that true friend in his wife. A successful marriage requires falling in love many times, always with the same person. Let the wife make the husband glad to come home, and let him make her sorry to see him leave.

2. Nowadays, marriage has become biggest gamble in human life. We never know when and how this relation sours and ends. Couples in urban areas split up more often than we might think. Unfortunately, couples often arrive for remedy with some knowledge that the relationship is either hanging by a thread or even that one or both members is seeking a sort of permission to dissolve the connection. There are cases where one of the partners approaches the court for a divorce, citing grounds such as cruelty or adultery. Such cases are mostly bitter and become a conflict about money, mainly because of vengeance.

3. This case presents a very unpleasant tale of an Ortho Doctor in Sivakasi and a B. Com. Graduate fighting a bitter matrimonial battle.

4. The unsuccessful wife has come up with the instant Civil Miscellaneous Appeal assailing the order of the Principal Family Court, Chennai, dated 27.02.2007 passed in F.C.O.P. No. 2135 of 2005 dismissing the Petition filed by the appellant / wife for divorce under Section 13 (1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of cruelty; for Rs.50 Lakhs towards permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Act; and for permanenty custody of her two minor sons under Section 26 of the Act.

5. In this Judgment, for the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the petition.

6. Shorn off unnecessary details, the indispensable skeletal material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy, in brief, are as follows:-

The petitioner / wife and the respondent / husband tied nuptial knot on 18.06.1995 as per the Hindu rites and customs, in Sivakasi. They were blessed with two children, by name, Mathana Gopal, who born on 26.8.1996 and Hari Hara Sudhan born on 08.4.1999. They lived together for five years and since 26.6.2000, they are living separately. Citing several instaces to allege that the respondent had treated the petitioner cruelly, she had filed the petition for divorce.

7. Counter affidavit was filed by the respondent, who, as seen from the papers, is an Orthopaedic surgeon, hailing from a middle class family, denying the allegations. It is stated that the petitioner stayed with her father on her own accord and returned to the matrimonial at her own whims and fancies. He denied the allegation that he never allowed the respondent to go anywhere. According to him, it is only on the security and safety point of view, he advised her to return early while she wanted to go to her relatives' house and he advised the respondent to avoid gossipping and loose talks with the flower vendor and milk vendor as they are the source of romour monger. It is also the case of respondent that since he has to devote most of the time in the Hospital attending the patients, he could not concentrate in certain family matters. Besides, according to the respondent, the petitioner left the matrimonial house on her own accord in his absence handing over the keys to the neighbours and only with a view to justify her decision, he has filed the petition for divorce. He also stated that he is always ready and willing to accept the petitioner. As regards the maintenance sought for by the petitioner, the respondent has stated in his counter that she is not entitled for maintenance as she wanted to part away with his company on false allegations. He has further stated that since he came from a middle class family and completed his studies by borrowing loan from Banks, he has to clear the same and hence, he is not in a position to pay alimony much less, Rs. 50,00,000/- as sought for by the petitioner. According to the respondent, the petition for divorce was filed on unfounded allegations.

8. Both the