Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dr.Justice G.Jayachandran, Ms. Justice R.Poornima, JJ
C.Raj – Appellant
Versus
E.Girija – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G.JAYACHANDRAN, R.POORNIMA, JJ.
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed seeking to set aside the fair and decretal order made in H.M.O.P.No.378 of 2018, dated 1.7.2019, on the file of District Family Court, Tiruchirappalli.
2.The appellant herein is the husband and the respondent is the wife. It is the admitted case that the marriage between the appellant and respondent was solemnized on 2.2.2009 according to Hindu rites and customs. They lived together only for seven days and got separated due to mistrust and accusation. The husband filed a Petition for divorce in H.M.O.P.No.121/2010 before the Sub Court, Trichy. The wife filed H.M.O.P.No.3895 of 2010 before the second Additional Family Court, Chennai for restitution of conjugal rights.She also filed M.C.NO.485 of 2010 for maintenance before the Family Court, Chennai. The cases were transferred to the Second Additional Family Court, Chennai and renumbered as H.M.O.P.No.1300 of 2011, on the file of Second Additional Family Court, Chennai and got dismissed for default on 5.6.2012. The Petition filed by the wife in H.M.O.P.No.3895/2010 for restitution of conjugal rights was allowed, whereas, the maintenance case filed by the
A party can file a fresh divorce petition under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act if the decree for restitution of conjugal rights is not enforced.
Long separation and failure to perform marital duties can constitute grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The statutory provision allows for divorce if no restitution of conjugal rights occurs for over a year post-decree, validating the grounds for divorce.
Matrimonial proceedings are based on a continuing cause of action, and the withdrawal of a previous petition for restitution of conjugal rights does not preclude the filing of a subsequent petition f....
Unsubstantiated allegations of sexual harassment by a spouse can amount to mental cruelty, thus justifying divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Normal marital disagreements and the presence of in-laws do not constitute mental cruelty sufficient for divorce. The petitioner did not provide adequate evidence to support claims.
The court affirmed that substantiated evidence is crucial for claims of cruelty or adultery in marital disputes, ruling that unjustified abandonment entitled the wife to restitution of conjugal right....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
