JUDGMENT :

T.RAJA, J.

1. Both husband and wife have filed separate appeals challenging the impugned fair and decreetal order passed by the learned VI Additional Family Court Judge, Chennai, in O.P.No.4364 of 2013, dated 27.12.2017, rejecting the payer for divorce and directing the husband to pay Rs.25,000/- towards monthly maintenance.

2. Mr.D.Sivakumar/husband has filed C.M.A.No.615 of 2018 questioning the grant of monthly maintenance to the tune of Rs.25,000/- per month.

3. Mrs.Parimala/wife has filed C.M.A.No.4054 of 2019 challenging the dismissal of divorce petition filed under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act and also against the dismissal of prayer seeking permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

4. Mrs.A.Arulmozhi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/wife in C.M.A.No.4054 of 2019, submitted that the marriage between the appellant/wife and the respondent/husband was solemnized on 24.04.1996 at Thayar Abooy Thirumana Mandapam, Cheyyar, as per Hindu Rites and Customs. Out of the said wedlock, a female child by name Ojas Sivakumar was born to them on 30.05.1997, and she is now practicing legal profession as a junior lawyer. After living together in Visakapatnam from 09.05.1996 to 26.09.1998, they are now settled in Chennai since 2000. The respondent/husband's parents owned a house in Velachery, Chennai, in which, half of the property i.e. 1000 sq.ft. was purchased by the appellant/wife's father through a registered sale deed dated 10.06.2002. Now, the wife's parents are living in the ground floor and in the first floor of the same house, the husband, child and his mother are living. It is further alleged that the appellant/wife was subjected to physical abuse and cruelty in various methods of neglect, ill-treatment and chiding in front of her minor daughter and mother-in-law, and this apart, she was also subjected to denial of conjugal rights for baseless allegation of having a deviant sexual orientation with her doctor N.Shalini/PW2 to whom the appellant/wife made periodical visit to get treated for the mental depression caused by domestic violence. It is further submitted that the respondent/husband's mother was very abusive and insulted her in many ways and on several occasions, the respondent/husband and his mother used to interfere in her work and tried to prevent her from doing her job. Whenever the appellant/wife complained to her husband about his mother undue interference and mental abuse, it was not taken care of. Moreover, the appellant/wife was not given any financial assistance as she started earning from 2005 onwards and therefore, the appellant/wife also shared the expenses of her daughter.

5. It is further submitted that at one point of time, the respondent/husband made a reckless allegation stating that she was a person of different sexual orientation and he further accused her stating that she is having physical relationship with her women colleagues and thereby, she was being labelled as lesbian etc. The said allegation was denied by the appellant/wife. In view of continuous ill-treatment, she had preferred a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act on 02.04.2012 to the Protection Officer, Collectorate, Chennai, and thereafter, the respondent/husband was summoned and he was advised to settle the matter amicably, but, he was not willing to accept any of the demands made by the appellant/wife. Subsequently, in the interest of minor child, the appellant/wife did not proceed with the case further. When a legal notice was issued on 16.06.2012 seeking consent for mutual divorce along with custody of minor child and right of residence, a reply notice dated 28.06.2012 was received stating that he was willing for joint custody of child with a condition that the appellant/wife has to leave the matrimonial home. Since the respondent/husband was not willing for amicable settlement, divorce by mutual consent could not be materialized.

6. Continuing further, it