JUDGMENT :

Since the issues involved in these appeals are interlinked, they are taken up together and a common Judgment is being passed.

2. Initially, the respondent/husband has filed H.M.O.P.No.1204 of 2011 under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Coimbatore for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. Thereafter, as per the orders of this Court in Tr.C.M.P. No.47 of 2012 on 15.03.2012, it was transferred to the Sub Court, Rasipuram and renumbered as H.M.O.P.No.14 of 2013. The appellant/wife has filed H.M.O.P.No.1 of 2012 under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act before the Sub Court, Rasipuram for Restitution of Conjugal Rights.

3. On 20.04.2015, the trial court has passed common order in both the petitions, viz., in H.M.O.P.No.1 of 2012, the prayer of the respondent/wife, for restitution of conjugal rights was allowed by directing the appellant/wife and the respondent/husband to live together as husband and wife. The H.M.O.P.No.14 of 2013 filed by the husband for grant of divorce was dismissed. As against the said order, the appellant/husband has filed C.M.A.No.5 of 2015 against O.P.No.1 of 2012, wherein restitution of conjugal rights was negatived and C.M.A.No.6 of 2015 was filed against H.M.O.P.No.14 of 2013, wherein the grant of divorce was ordered, thereby the marriage held on 22.10.2007 was dissolved. Aggrieved against the said common order, the appellant/wife has preferred these appeals.

4. The case of the appellant/wife is that she got married to the respondent on 22.10.2007 at Sri Thanthondeeswarar temple at Coimbatore as per Hindu Rites and Customs and her parents had given 32 sovereigns of gold; all the house hold articles; 3 sovereigns of gold to the respondent and Rs.40,000/- as cash. After the marriage, both of them were living at Singapore and a boy child was born. Later, the respondent came back to India along with the appellant and left her at her parents house in the month of April, 2010 and after six months, the respondent had started his own business at Coimbatore. In the said business, all the family members were made as partners. The family members of the respondent/husband used to torture the appellant for various reasons and they were trying to separate both the parties. The respondent has filed H.M.P.No.204 of 2011 for divorce before the Family Court, Coimbatore, when he came and left the appellant at Coimbatore in the year 2010, further, the appellant was not aware of the reason as to why the respondent has filed a petition for divorce and she has filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights.

5. The respondent/husband in his petition for divorce has stated that they did not demand any jewels, dowry or house hold articles from the appellant and they themselves had given 32 sovereigns of gold and marriage expenses were borne by the respondent. After 10 days of marriage, they proceeded to Singapore and while residing at Singapore, the appellant used to nag the husband and started interfering in his business matters. The appellant had enquired who are all the business partners and she never used to be a loving and affectionate wife and she used to be rude and quarrel with him always. Due to the mental agony, the respondent was feeling depressed. The appellant started suspecting the respondent's character and she also claimed that her husband has purchased car for his sister by paying an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- and quarreled with him. The appellant was also on the presumption that the respondent's sister and sister's husband and the respondent's brother all are doing business jointly. However, they had no connection with the respondent, but the appellant had been complaining about the same and started quarreling with the respondent. Inspite of the repeated assurances, he never had any hesitation and went on in his own way and the respondent with no other way, came to India on 23.01.2009, left the appellant and went to Singapore and worked there for five months. Th