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

2021 Supreme(Mad) 2340

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. VAIDYANATHAN, G. JAYACHANDRAN, JJ.
A. Arockiya Shanthi – Appellant
Versus
A . Arokiasamy alias Arokiya Jagan Lawrence – Respondent
C.M.A.(MD) No. 34 of 2020 & C.M.P.(MD) No. 649 of 2020
Decided on : 30-11-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :M. Gurudas, Advocate
For the Respondent:N. Tamilmani, Advocate

Headnote:

Family Courts Act, 1984 - Section 19(1) - Indian Divorce Act, 1869 - Section 55 and 10(1)(x) -Divorce - Parties are Christians by religion - They got married - At the time of marriage, respondent/husband was serving in Army - After marriage, he left appellant/wife at his parents' house and joined duty - He used to visit his family during his leave period - Being the spouse of Army Personnel, appellant got employment as a Teacher under Servicemen quota - She is working as a Teacher - After getting employment, attitude of appellant changed and whenever respondent came to his native during leave, he found that his wife leading a wayward life, developed intimacy with her colleague - Instead of staying with his parents and taking care of his age old parents and mentally retarded sister, she was staying with her parents, she used to go to School along with said one in his two wheeler and even during his visit, she used to stay at her parents during weekend and go to School from her parents' house - She stopped contacting respondent/husband over phone and refused to lead congenial marital life even during his short visits to the native - He filed a petition under Section 10(1)(x) of the Indian Divorce Act - Whether before or after commencement of Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001, may, on a petition presented to District Court either by the husband or the wife, be dissolved on ground that since solemnization of marriage, respondent– Held, In said circumstances, evidence placed before Court indicates that marriage between appellant and respondent was not cordial - Dispute and misunderstanding between parties and their family members had arisen, which has led to withdrawal from the marital company - Cross-examination and suggestion put on behalf of appellant to witnesses clearly indicates that insistent of transfer of husband property in her name to have a separate marital home has led to break down - Respondent, a person serving in Army, has visited his native after long interval - In the said circumstances, this Court is of view that the conclusion of trial Court that marriage between parties has broken and reached stage of impossibility of re-union cannot be held as perverse or baseless - Harm by torturing person mentally by conduct will fall within the scope of Section 10(1)(x) of the Indian Divorce Act - In view of conclusion, this Court holds that appeal deserves to be dismissed, accordingly, dismissed - Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

JUDGMENT :

S.VAIDYANATHAN, G.JAYACHANDRAN, JJ.

(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 and Section 55 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, to set aside the fair order, granting divorce to the respondent/appellant's husband, by the learned Judge, Family Court, in I.D.O.P.No.15 of 2018, dated 14.10.2019.)

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred by the wife being aggrieved by the decree of dissolution of marriage passed by the Family Court, Sivagangai, dated 14.10.2019.

2. The parties are Christians by religion. They got married on 20.05.2005 at Vyakula Matha Church, Thirukalli Village, Ilayankudi Taluk. At the time of marriage, the respondent/husband was serving in Army. After the marriage, he left the appellant/wife at his parents' house and joined duty. He used to visit his family during his leave period. Being the spouse of Army Personnel, the appellant got employment as a Teacher under Servicemen quota. Since 20.10.2005 she is working as a Teacher. After getting employment, the attitude of the appellant changed and whenever the respondent came to his native during leave, he found that his wife leading a wayward life, developed intimacy with her colleague by name, Sasidharan. Instead of staying with his parents and taking care of his age old parents and mentally retarded sister, she was staying with her parents, she used to go to School along with the said Sasidharan in his two wheeler and even during his visit, she used to stay at her parents during weekend and go to School from her parents' house. She stopped contacting the respondent/husband over phone and refused to lead congenial marital life even during his short visits to the native. Hence, he filed a petition under Section 10(1)(x) of the Indian Divorce Act.

3. The appellant herein has filed a detailed counter, wherein, she has stated that the allegations found in the petition are not true. After marriage, on 20.05.2005 with fond hope that the in-laws will take proper care of her in the absence of her husband, who is serving in the Army, she entered the marital life, however, she was not treated properly by her in-laws in the absence of her husband. Her father-in-law was not a man of good conduct. He used to misbehave with her and tortured her. Knowing about that, her husband arranged for a separate accommodation for her in the first floor of the in-laws house. Despite that, her father-in-law did not change his attitude and used to abuse her in drunken stage. Whenever her husband came on leave, she used to complain about this. But, her husband did not care to prevent the same. The conduct of the father-in-law has caused severe mental torture. In the said circumstances, the father of the appellant/wife viz., Arulanand died and the Village elders advised her to stay in her parents' house and visit Thirukalli Village whenever her husband comes down to the native on leave. Accordingly, she was staying in her parents' house and attending her duty. Since she did not conceive even after six years of marriage, they decided to have a test tube baby in the year 2011. However, her husband refused to take the medicines prescribed by the Doctor and used to take drinks and smoke, further, forced her to have intercourse frequently and tortured her sexually. Whenever her husband came to his native on leave, he used to roam around, drink and go to home at odd hours and tortured her by all means. She was not given proper status of a wife and did not care for her comfort. In respect of the property referred in the petition, it is pleaded that, for the said property, consideration was paid by her, but under threat, her husband forced to get the property registered in his name. Her jewels were pledged by her husband and he borrowed a sum of Rs.6,00,000/-, for which, he neither paid the interest nor the principal to redeem the jewels. Since she has been continuously tortured and subjected to cruelty, her health got deteriorated and she wa

    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