J U D G M E N T

The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 05.08.2020 passed in H.M.C.M.A.No.1 of 2018 on the file of the I Additional District Court, Tiruppur reversing the judgment and decree dated 07.07.2017 passed in H.M.O.P.No.54 of 2012 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tiruppur.

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

The marriage between herself and the respondent took place on 09.05.2010. After the pregnancy of the appellant, on 09.12.2010, the bangle function of the appellant/wife was celebrated in the respondent's house on 09.12.2010, and thereafter, she went to her parental home and thereafter, they were blessed with a male child on 03.02.2011. On 05.06.2011, the appellant came to her matrimonial home for attending the naming ceremony of the child and on that day, the respondent demanded dowry and due to some wordy quarrel, she left her matrimonial home. Thereafter, the appellant tried to live with the respondent, but he refused to live with her and hence, she gave a complaint against the respondent. During the enquiry, she came to know that the respondent has filed a petition seeking divorce on the ground of mental cruelty under Section 13(1)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tiruppur in H.M.O.P.No.54 of 2012, which came to be dismissed on 07.07.2017. Challenging the said dismissal, the respondent/husband filed an appeal before the I Additional District Court, Tiruppur in H.M.C.M.A.No.1 of 2018. The first appellate Court allowed the appeal and dissolved the marriage solemnized between the appellant and the respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant/wife has come forward with the present second appeal.

3. At the time of admission, this Court has formulated the following substantial questions of law on 10.02.2021 :

(i)Whether the First Appellate Court (I Additional District Court) has discretionary powers to overlook the facts recorded by based on evidence by the Principal Sub Court ? and (ii) When there is no specific pleading in the petition substantiated by relevant evidence to corroborate averments stemming from after thoughts and when the divorce petition has been dismissed by the Sub Court, how could the Appellate Court reverse the order of lower Court ? ''

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the trial Court dismissed the divorce petition on the ground that there was no pleadings in the main petition in respect of cruelty and the evidence adduced by the husband is not supported by pleadings. However, the First Appellate Court, while allowing the appeal had taken into consideration the subsequent events pleaded by the respondent/husband, but actually there were no pleadings and substance in the divorce petition filed by the respondent/husband. He further submitted that, without pleadings, no amount of evidence can be let in and that evidence need not be looked into. Further, the grounds raised in the petition for divorce are not sufficient to grant divorce. In order to get divorce, the respondent has made certain bald allegations, however, the allegations levelled in the petition are not substantiated with the material evidence. Therefore, the impugned order of the First Appellate Court is perverse, which warrants interference by this Court.

5.The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent/husband has specifically pleaded in the petition about the act of cruelty allegedly committed by her and that has been substantiated by him through oral and documentary evidence, however, the trial Court failed to appreciate the same and dismissed the petition. He further submitted that even after the petition was filed by the respondent, the appellant/wife gave a complaint before the All Women Police Station, for demand of dowry as well as domestic violence, not only against the respondent/husband, but also against his family members and relatives, which clearly shows that the appellant w