JUDGMENT :

T. RAJA, J.

1. Mrs.P.Maheswari, the appellant herein, aggrieved over the common order of dismissal passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Salem in F.C.O.P.No.123 of 2015 filed by her for restitution of conjugal rights and also having suffered yet another decree passed in F.C.O.P.No.517 of 2013 by dissolving the marriage that took place on 26.11.2012 between the appellant and the respondent, has come to this Court with these civil miscellaneous appeals.

2. Mr.M.Vijayan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/wife pleaded that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 26.11.2012 as per the Hindu rites and customs in the presence of the well-wishers belonging to both families and they were happily living together in the matrimonial home. However, after sometime, the respondent/husband filed the F.C.O.P.No.517 of 2013 seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Court below making various allegations against the appellant herein. The first allegation was that the appellant has deliberately and wilfully concealed her first marriage with one Alageshan. The second allegation made by the respondent/husband was that even on trivial issues, the appellant/wife used to behave violently and pickup quarrels with the respondent/husband and his family members. The third allegation put against the appellant herein was that she never discharged her household duties as a dutiful wife. On the other hand, she caused bodily injuries to the respondent herein on many occasions and repeatedly scolded the respondent to leave his parents in an old age home. Opposing the above allegations, learned counsel appearing for the appellant pleaded that so far as the first allegation that the appellant/wife has suppressed the factum of her first marriage is concerned, the certified copy of the judgment and decree dated 6.7.2012 passed by the Family Court, Salem in O.S.No.25 of 2011 would clearly indicate that the said marriage with one Alageshan was declared as null and void and the said fact was also brought to the notice of the respondent and his family members by the appellant's parents even during the marriage talks. Secondly, one Mrs.Lakshmi, a relative of the appellant, who was examined as R.W.2, has also deposed that she was present during the marriage talks between the families of the appellant and the respondent and that the fact regarding the first marriage of the appellant with one Alageshan was intimated to the respondent's family during the marriage talks. Accepting the explanation offered by the appellant/wife, the Court below has come to the conclusion that the appellant and her family members has not suppressed the fact regarding the first marriage of the appellant with Alageshan. Therefore, when the alleged suppression of the first marriage was disbelieved, the Court below, accepting the other allegations that the appellant/wife has behaved violently and picked up quarrels with the respondent and his family members; that she did not do any household works and abused the family members and that she also caused bodily injuries to the respondent on many occasions, ought not to have allowed the petition for divorce filed by the respondent/husband on the ground of cruelty. Thirdly, the Court below ought not to have dismissed the petition filed by the appellant/wife under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights on the ground that it was filed belatedly after a period of two years only as a counter blast to the divorce petition filed by the respondent. Since the Court below has come to the conclusion that the appellant/wife has repeatedly filed criminal complaints against the respondent and his family members for no reason that have caused mental cruelty not only to the respondent/husband, but also to his family members, which is not correct, the present appeals have been filed. Mr.Vijayan, assailing the impugned decretal order dissolving