JUDGMENT

Devan Ramachandran, J.

This case initially presented to us as being quotidian in nature, with the respondent apparently seeking divorce from the petitioner; and for a declaration of the marital status of the parties.

2. However, quickly the colour of the litigation changed, presenting varying complexities, when we noticed that the facts involved are rather unusual. This is because, unlike in usual cases where validation of a declaration of Talaq and its endorsement is sought for by the husband, it is the wife, in this case, who seeks it, but with the husband opposing it.

3. Interestingly, it is without contest that it was the respondent - wife, who filed O.P.No.1470/2023 seeking endorsement of the Talaq pronounced by the petitioner – husband, and consequently, for the declaration of divorce between them; but which is vehemently opposed by the petitioner, asserting that, even though he had pronounced Talaq more than six years earlier to the filing of the Original Petition, the same had been invalidated by the subsequent conduct of the parties, particularly - that of the respondent.

4. The proximate controversy in this case revolves around the validity of Ext.P10 order of the lea