COMMON JUDGMENT

These appeals have been filed to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 16.12.2020, passed in H.M.C.M.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2017 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Virudhunagar District confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 05.09.2017 passed in H.M.O.P.Nos.87 and 77 of 2012.

2.The facts in brief:

It is a matrimonial issue. The petition in H.M.O.P.No.77 of

2012 was filed by the husband namely Selvarajan against the wife namely the second respondent seeking the order of divorce dissolving the marriage solemnized between them on 05.09.2010 with the following averments. The marriage between the parties were solemnized as per their customary rites on 05.09.2010 in Selva Vinayagar Kalyana Mandapam, Virudhunagar. A male child by name Sanjai Karthik was born. Within a month of the marriage misunderstanding arose between them. At that time, he was employed at Karur Vaisiya Bank for about 7 months. They are living together. Later he was transferred to Tiruvanamalai. Even in Tiruvannamalai there is no understanding between them. After few months of marriage, the respondent started to treat the petitioner cruelly; went to the parents home for about 6 months without any reason, used to abuse him and his family members. She was making compulsion upon the petitioner not to give any support to the parents. And started saying that she married a impotent person. Even went to the extent of stating that he showing his private parts. And for about three times, she threatened to commit suicide, in the month of July and August 2012. On 01.09.2012 she went to her parental home and thereafter did not return. When the petitioner visited the house, he was not permitted inside. The petitioner was made to suffer Psychologically and physically also. But efforts made by the petitioner for having peaceful life did not yield any result. He filed the petition seeking divorce.

3.Counter was filed by the wife stating that the allegation in the petition are false and invented for the purpose of getting divorce. There was no proper understanding during their living in Mumbai and Thiruvannamalai. On 02.09.2012, they came to attend the relatives' marriage. They came down to Virudhunagar and visited both parental houses; The petitioner and the respondent purchased saree, mobile phone for the wedding day to be celebrated on 05.09.2012. On 02.09.2012, he was taken to her parental home by the petitioner himself and left there promising to return back and take them, on 03.09.2012. In stead of taking the child and wife to the matrimonial home, he did not come back to pick up them.

4.Simultaneously, H.M.O.P.No.87 of 2012 was filed by the wife under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking order of restitution of conjugal rights. Counter was filed reiterating the very same averments made in the petition seeking divorce. Both were taken up by Sub Judge, Virudhunagar.

5.At the conclusion of the enquiry process the husband's petition seeking divorce was dismissed and the wife's petition for restitution of conjugal rights was allowed, by common order, dated 05.09.2017. Against which the husband filed two appeals before the appellate Court namely the Additional district Judge, Virudhunagar in C.M.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2017. A common order was passed dismissing both appeals concurring with the finding of fact recorded by the trial Court. Against which these two Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeals are filed by the husband.

6.Heard both sides.

7.The marriage took place on 05.09.2010. At that time, the husband was employed in a private bank in Mumbai. For about 7 months, there was no problem between them. In fact a child was born on 12.07.2011. After 11 months, they living jointly in Thiruvannamalai. Husband travelled to Thiruvannamalai. Wife was also followed him and living together. There was no problem between them according to the wife. All of a sudden on 04.09.2012, which means within 5 months from the date of birth of the child, according to the w