The main legal point established in the judgment is that false accusations, defamatory publications, and complaints to the employer can constitute mental cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act, leading to the grant of divorce.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure r/w Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955, to set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Paramakudi in H.M.C.M.A.No.2 of 2017 dated 31.10.2018 by confirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Paramakudi in H.M.O.P.No.83 of 2012, dated 20.04.2017.

Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure r/w Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955, to set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Paramakudi in H.M.C.M.A.No.4 of 2017 dated 31.10.2018 by confirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Paramakudi in H.M.O.P.No.67 of 2012, dated 20.04.2017.)

Common Judgement:

1. The appellant herein had filed H.M.O.P.No.67 of 2012 on the file of Sub Court, Paramakudi seeking divorce on the ground of mental cruelty and desertion. The wife had filed H.M.O.P.No.83 of 2012 on the file of Sub Court, Paramakudi for restitution of conjugal rights. Both the petitions were heard together. The divorce petition filed by the husband was dismissed and the restitution of conjugal rights petition filed by the wife was decreed by the trial Court. Challenging the same, the husband had filed H.M.C.M.A.Nos.2 and 4 of 2017 on the file of Additional District Court, Paramakudi. Both the appeals were dismissed confirming the judgment and decree of the trial Court. Challenging the same, the husband has filed C.M.S.A(MD)Nos.5 and 6 of 2019.

2. The contentions of the appellant / husband in the divorce petition could be summarized as follows:

(i) The husband and wife both are school teachers and they got married on 24.05.2010 as per Hindu customs and traditions at Shri Subramaniaswamy Temple, Abiramam near Paramakudi, Ramnad District.

(ii) The wife was unnecessarily picking up quarrel with the husband and she was compelling the husband to convert to Christianity.

(iii) The wife was continuously making false allegations as against the husband that he was having illicit relationship with a teacher who was working in the same school.

(iv) The wife was not interested in having a child and she had undergone abortion without the knowledge or consent of the husband.

(v) The wife was not interested in having conjugal relationship and she threatened to commit suicide if she was compelled to have conjugal relationship.

3. The contentions of the wife could be summarized as follows:

(i) The divorce petition has been filed by the husband only to lead an illicit relationship with another teacher.

(ii) The husband used to stay for many days in the house of another teacher and refused to lead a matrimonial life with the wife.

(iii) The husband used to carry another teacher by name, Julia Rebekka Gnanasundari as a pillion rider in his bike often and he used to compare the wife with the said lady. A Panchayat was conducted by the village elders and thereafter, the husband and wife started living together between June 2012 to September 2012. Thereafter, the husband picked up a quarrel and drove away the wife. Therefore, the allegations of the husband that the wife has inflicted mental cruelty and she had deserted her husband are not factually correct.

(iv) The wife has further contended that the husband has driven away the wife and he is refusing to live with the wife without any reasonable cause. Therefore, she prayed for a decree for restitution for conjugal rights.

4. The findings of the trial Court:

(i) The husband has not established that the wife was not willing to have conjugal relationship.

(ii) The husband has not established the fact that he was compelled to follow Christianity.

(iii) The husband has not place