1. The petitioner/husband in a matrimonial proceedings, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Court below, has preferred these revisions.

2. Heard both sides.

3. The brief facts of the case for the disposal of these civil revision petitions would run thus:

(i) The petitioner/husband herein filed HMOP No. 320 of 2011 under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce as against the wife on the ground of cruelty. Pending HMOP, the respondent/wife has filed two applications, viz., I.A. No. 508 of 2014 seeking interim maintenance to her and the minor child in a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- per month and a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards litigation expenses and I.A. No. 507 of 2014 seeking a direction directing the revision petitioner to undergo medical examination by a competent Psychiatrist to find the truth about his wilful refusal to have normal consummation.

(ii) It is the case of the respondent/wife that immediately after the marriage, they both lived in United Kingdom and they begot a female child. However, it is alleged by the wife that the petitioner/husband is incapable of having normal sexual conduct with her and that he is having a psychological dysfunction in sex. Hence, she has filed the above application to subject the husband for examination by a competent Psychiatrist. The other application was filed by her seeking maintenance.

(iii) The applications were contested by the revision petitioner/husband denying all the allegations. It is also stated that after the filing of the original petition by the husband for divorce, the wife also has filed another petition for restitution of conjugal rights. The petitioner/husband was also mutually alleging that the wife was not normal and directed her to undergo psychological test. The petitioner had alleged that the wife had mood swings and always got easily irritated and angry. In fact, she used to abuse the husband physically. Despite such mutual allegations, a female child was born to them. Therefore, the petitioner/husband sought for dismissal of the aforesaid applications.

(iv) The learned Subordinate Judge, Tambaram allowed the application in I.A. No. 507 of 2014 based on Ex.P1-E-mail, which is an article titled as "Vindhuvin Magimai" sent by the petitioner/husband to the respondent/wife and I.A. No. 508 of 2014 was allowed by directing the petitioner/husband to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the wife and Rs.75,000/- to the minor child.

4. Challenging both the orders, the above two Civil Revision Petitions have been filed by the husband.

5. Heard both sides and perused the orders passed by the Court below.

6. Merely because an article has been sent by the husband to the wife does not mean that the husband is having psychological dysfunction in sex. He could have thought that it would be useful for her to know about the same. The respondent/wife herself has filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights subsequent to the filing of the divorce petition by the petitioner/husband. The wife seems to have filed a petition with a least intention of joining the matrimonial home, which is evident from her attitude in directing the petitioner to subject himself for medical examination without any basis. It is not in dispute that a child also has been born to the respondent through the petitioner. While so, the allegation, especially, after having filed an application to join her husband, is unwarranted. It is only to humiliate the husband, who has filed an application seeking divorce, the wife has filed such an application.

7. In matrimonial matters, already the parties are at logger heads and their feelings are subjective. While so, the Courts have to go slow in ordering these kinds of applications, by weighing the circumstances in favour of the parties, who have approached the Court. Mechanically allowing such applications would only further widen the gap between the spouses, who are at logger heads. The intention of the Court should be only to unite the coupl