JUDGMENT

(Prayer in C.M.S.A(MD)No.20 of 2021: Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1956 r/w Order 41 Rule 4 and Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 07.12.2019 made in H.M.C.M.A.No.3 of 2019 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Paramakudi, confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 18.01.2019 made in H.M.O.P.No.16 of 2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Mudukulathoor and allow this Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal.

In C.M.S.A(MD)No.21 of 2021: Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1956 r/w Order 41 Rule 4 and Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 07.12.2019 made in H.M.C.M.A.No.4 of 2019 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Paramakudi, confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 18.01.2019 made in H.M.O.P.No.40 of 2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Mudukulathoor and allow this Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal.)

Common Judgment:

1. These Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeals are preferred against the common judgment and decree dated 07.12.2019 made in H.M.C.M.A.Nos.3 of 2019 and 4 of 2019 on the file of the Additional District Court (FTC), Paramakudi, confirming the common judgment and decree dated 18.01.2019 passed in H.M.O.P.Nos.16 of 2017 and 40 of 2017 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mudukulathoor.

2. The appellant is the husband and the respondent is the wife.

3. The appellant is petitioner in H.M.O.P.No.16 of 2017 and respondent in H.M.O.P.No.40 of 2017 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mudukulathoor.

4. For the sake convenience, the parties are referred as petitioner/husband and respondent/wife as adopted in H.M.O.P.No.16 of 2017 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mudukulathoor.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner and the respondent are husband and wife and their marriage was solemnized on 27.08.2015.At the time of marriage 17 sovereign gold jewels and seer articles were given. After marriage, the petitioner and the respondent were living happily for 10 days. Thereafter, the respondent used to talk frequently through cellphone and insisted the petitioner for separate life. The respondent used to talk with her mother commenting upon the petitioner as if he looks to be an old man and bad smell from mouth. The respondent used to ignore the cohabitation and she did not allow for consummation. The respondent demanded money from the petitioner and used to make frequent quarrels if not paid. The respondent disrespected the parents of the petitioner and the petitioner by scolding with untold words in the public place. Moreover, the respondent filed complaint before the All Women Police Station Keelakarai against the petitioner and his family members alleging demand of dowry and harassment. She filed DVC.No.1 of 2016 and M.C.No.4 of 2016 before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Mudukulathoor seeking maintenance. By the acts of the respondent, she caused mental cruelty to the petitioner. The petitioner suffered not only from mental strain, but also physical strain. The respondent left the matrimonial home. There is no possibility of reunion. Hence, the petitioner has filed the petition in H.M.O.P.No.16 of 2017 against the respondent seeking for divorce.

6. It is the case of the respondent/wife that the marriage between the parties solemnized as per Hindu rites and customs is admitted. At the time of marriage 17 sovereign gold jewels to respondent, 5 sovereign gold to petitioner and cash of Rs.1,00,000/- with seer articles worth Rs.1,00,000/- were given to the petitioner. The respondent denied the allegations that the respondent used to talk through cell phone and to make frequent quarrels with petitioner and that she neglected the consummation. The petitioner is a mechanic and he used to stay in his mechanic shop many days. On enquiry, the petitioner had illicit intimacy wit