C.M.A.(MD).No.1201 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved on : 16.10.2023

Delivered on: 08.11.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN

AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI

C.M.A.(MD).No.1201 of 2022

J.Janakiram

... Appellant / Petitioner

Vs.

M.Sathyabama

... Respondent / Respondent

Prayer:- Appeal filed under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1955, read

with Section 104 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and

decree, dated 03.09.2022, made in H.M.O.P.No.82 of 2020, on the file of

the Family Court, Srivilliputtur.

For Appellant

:

Mr.J.Thomas Rajadurai

For Respondent

:

Mr.M.Sankar

JUDGMENT

P.B.BALAJI,J.

The unsuccessful husband before the Family Court in

H.M.O.P.No.82 of 2020, aggrieved by the dismissal of his petition for

division, is the appellant before us.

1/15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.(MD).No.1201 of 2022

2. The brief facts of the case are as under:

The husband filed H.M.O.P.No.82 of 2020, seeking dissolution

of his marriage with the respondent on the grounds of cruelty and

desertion. The appellant and the respondent were married on 25.10.2009

and on an earlier occasion, H.M.O.P.No.214 of 2014 was filed by the

husband, seeking dissolution of marriage, on the ground that the

respondent - wife had alleged that the appellant - husband had an illicit

affair with Ramani. However, the said H.M.O.P was withdrawn, in order

to save the matrimonial life. However, again the respondent came up with

a new allegation that the appellant was having an illicit affair with one

Amaladevi and that the respondent has also repeatedly given several

complaints to the higher officials of the appellant, without any basis,

whatsoever. All these acts of the wife had given mental agony to husband.

Further, insofar as desertion, the appellant alleges that the wife has left the

matrimonial home and has been living with her mother for over 5 years,

without any justifiable cause and therefore, the appellant sought for

dissolution of marriage on both the grounds of cruelty as well as desertion.

2/15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.(MD).No.1201 of 2022

3. The respondent / wife resisted the said application. It is the

case of the respondent that as she was working as a teacher, it was

convenient to attend her work if she stayed with her mother and only under

such circumstances, that too, with the consent of her husband, the

respondent was staying with her mother. The respondent chose to reiterate

the allegation with regard to the illicit affairs of the appellant and the

respondent sought for dismissal of the petition for divorce.

4. Before the Family Court, on the side of the appellant, the

appellant examined himself as P.W.1 and his mother – Vijayakumari

examined as P.W.2 and one Kalavathy examined as P.W.3 and 2

documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P2. On the side of the respondent,

wife examined herself as R.W.1 and 3 documents were marked as Ex.R1 to

Ex.R3, in which, Ex.R1 and Ex.R3 were photographs showing the

appellant being with Amaladevi. Ex.P2 and Ex.R2 are photographs taken

with the appellant and the respondent being together.

3/15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.(MD).No.1201 of 2022

5. On appreciating the oral and documentary evidence adduced

before it, the Family Court finding that the appellant had not proved his

allegation of cruelty meted out by his wife and also desertion, dismissed

the petition seeking dissolution of marriage.

6. Aggrieved by the same, the husband has preferred the present

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal on the grounds that the Family Court failed to

see that repeated allegations of illicit affairs levelled against the appellant

would amount to mental cruelty; the Family Court has not considered that

the photographs exhibited (Ex.R3) by the respondent showing the

appellant to be