Legal proceedings initiated in good faith to protect one's rights or property do not constitute mental cruelty. Concurrent findings of fact by trial and appellate courts regarding the absence of cruelty and desertion will not be disturbed by higher courts unless the decision is found to be perverse.

JUDGMENT :

P.VADAMALAI, J.

This Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree, dated 30.07.2021 passed in C.M.A.No.5 of 2019 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Court, Thanjavur, confirming the order, dated 12.12.2018 passed in H.M.O.P.No.1 of 2014 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Court, Thanjavur.

2.The appellant is the petitioner/husband in H.M.O.P.No.1 of 2014 and the respondent is the respondent/wife therein.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as petitioner/husband and respondent/wife as arrayed in H.M.O.P.No.1 of 2014 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Court, Thanjavur.

4. Case of the petitioner/husband:-

The petitioner and the respondent are husband and wife. Their marriage was solemnized on 13.02.2011 as per the Hindu rites and customs at Thanjavur. After marriage, they led a matrimonial life in Hyderabad. Out of wedlock, a male child was born on 21.12.2011. After delivery, the respondent returned to Hyderabad on 28.02.2012. At the instigation of extraneous persons, including her parents, the respondent wantonly failed to abide by the request of the petitioner and left him. In spite of talks, the respondent and her family members threatened the petitioner and his family that they would put them to immense hardship by invoking criminal proceedings. So, the petitioner and his family members obtained anticipatory bail from the High Court of Madras in Crl.O.P(MD)No.7326 of 2012. Before the Tamil Nadu Mediation Centre, Chennai, both parties agreed to live together and the respondent accompanied the petitioner to Hyderabad on 10.07.2012. However, the respondent started to harass the petitioner. There were unnecessary quarrel made by her on 12.08.2012 and 13.08.2012. The respondent threatened the petitioner with a knife for committing suicide and to harm him as well. On 14.08.2012, when the petitioner was in his office, the respondent left the matrimonial home without the consent of the petitioner by sending an e-mail stating that she was leaving the matrimonial house as she was not getting the affection she expected from the petitioner.

She also sent an SMS with a false complaint to the Thanjavur police against the petitioner. When the respondent was pregnant, the respondent used to tell the father of the petitioner to abort the child. From the beginning, the respondent was adamant in nature and did not show any interest in matrimonial life and she used to harass the petitioner by using filthy words. Because of the attitude of the respondent, the petitioner suffered not only from mental strain but also physical strain. The respondent left the matrimonial home on 14.08.2012 and has been living with her parents. There is no possibility of reunion. Hence, the petitioner has filed a petition against the respondent seeking a divorce.

5. Case of the respondent/wife:-

The marriage of both parties and the birth of a male child are admitted. The respondent along with the child, went to Hyderabad and resided there until 28.02.2012. The parents and sister of the petitioner demanded a diamond stud and a silver kuthuvilakku. Upon her refusal, the petitioner attacked the respondent, so she informed the same to her paternal uncle, who lodged a police complaint before the All Women Police Station, Thanjavur. An enquiry was conducted by the police and the petitioner and his parent assured them that they would take back the respondent within one month. But the petitioner sent a legal notice to the respondent on 10.04.2012.

In the meantime, before the Mediation Centre, the High Cour