CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR) This appeal is by the petitioner in M.C.3492/2011 on the file of IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, who initiated action for dissolution of his marriage with respondent/wife, by invoking section 10(x) of Indian Divorce Act. Since the Family Court by its judgment dated 11.6.2019 dismissed the petition, he has filed this appeal.

2. The appellant and the respondent are Christians, their marriage was solemnized on 04.01.2002 at Church of South India (CSI), Karungal, Tamil Nadu. In the wedlock, they begot two sons. The appellant was doing business in Computers at Chennai at the time when he married the respondent, and in the year 2004, he and the respondent shifted their residence to Bengaluru as he secured an employment in Bengaluru.

3. The appellant, in his petition, has narrated several instances to seek divorce on the ground of cruelty. The main allegations are that in the course of time, the respondent started harassing him, and sometime in the year of 2005, she poured hot water on him consequent to which he sustained burn injuries and could not walk properly. She refused to prepare food for him and the child, and she was not taking care of the child also. She along with her kith and kins tried to take away all his earnings. She was going out of the house without informing him the place where she was going, and she refused to divulge information as to the place where she had gone. This made him opt for nightshift work so that he could take care of the children during day time. As he was working in a software concern, he had to leave headquarter whenever his employer asked him to go out on office work, and on one such occasion he had to go out of Bengaluru on 05.03.2011. When he returned home on 07.03.2011, he was shocked to see many things including his computers, utensils, gas stove, etc., missing. On enquiry with the security of the apartment where he was living, he came to know that on 06.03.2011 itself she was found boarding a vehicle. As he could not trace her whereabouts despite enquiry with his relatives and friends, he had to make missing complaint at R.T.Nagar Police Station. Because leaving Bengaluru abruptly, his son who was attending annual examination, could not appear for examination in all subjects and thereby he lost one year. The respondent filed false complaints against him alleging that he harassed her for dowry. He was harassed by the police and this made him obtain anticipatory bail. She also filed a complaint against him at Nagarcoil on 10.03.2011, and another petition before the Judicial Magistrate at Nagarcoil under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

3.1. Her behaviour with children was not good. On one occasion she tried to hit her first son with a knife as the son disclosed that his mother was lying. Without bringing to his knowledge, she sent the children to the house of her relative at Nagarcoil, and with much efforts he could locate the children. When he went there to bring back children, his wife’s relative demanded for substantial money to give the children to his custody and this made him approach the police. Like this, the petitioner alleges cruelty on him by his wife.

4. The respondent out rightly denied all the allegations made against her by the petitioner and counter blasted by stating that after the marriage, the petitioner and his sister mortgaged all her jewelleries with a bank where the petitioner’s sister was working; that she was demanded to bring dowry; that at the time of marriage, the petitioner’s business was sinking and therefore she was compelled to borrow money from her relatives and friends. She stated that she too worked with the petitioner even during her pregnancy, and because of her contribution, physically and financially, the petitioner was able to regain his business. When she had gone to her parents house, he closed down his business without informing her although there was in