2025:MHC:860 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.03.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE R.POORNIMA C.M.A(MD)No.534 of 2019 and C.M.P(MD)No.6253 of 2019 Shally Roselin ... Appellant/Petitioner .Vs.

Aaron Durairaj ... Respondent/Respondent PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act praying this Court to set aside the fair and decretal order made in I.D.O.P.No.149 of 2017, dated 26.11.2018 on the file of Family Court, Tirunelveli.

For Appellant : Ms.K.Shwathini for M/s.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For Respondent : Mr.K.Samidurai

JUDGMENT

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN., J AND R.POORNIMA.,J The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal by the wife being aggrieved by the dismissal of her petition for divorce filed on the ground of cruelty.

2.The brief facts of the case is that:

Shally Roselin, the appellant and Aaron Durairaj, the respondnet were married as per Christian rites and customs on 29.12.2003.The appellant is a Teacher by profession serving in the management school under CSI, Tirunelveli Diocese. Two children were born to them and thereafter their marriage relationship has broken down leading to filing of a petition for divorce by the wife alleging that she had been subjected to cruelty, since the date of marriage. The husband is suffering from serious ailment and used to force his wife and her parents to part away with jewels and money to meet his medical expenses. Due to his chronic illness, the husband used to be in the hospital at least six to seven days in a month and as a dutiful wife, she used to take care of him. But due to his guilty conscious and suspicious mentality, her husband had tortured her both physically and mentally. She was admitted in the hospital for the injury sustained in the attack for a period of three days between 13.8.2026 to 16.8.2016. Again on 14.11.2026, she was physically assaulted by her husband on 5.4.2017. He attempted to push her from her moving car.The said allegation was vehemently opposed by the husband-respondent in his counter, particularly, the allegation regarding cruelty and ill health was vehemently denied. The respondent husband contended that he is serving as a Reverend in CSI Saint Immanuvel Church, cheranmahadevi and earning a monthly income of Rs.39,000/- and also serving as correspondent of seven schools. He had never forced his wife to give money for his medical expenses. Further he is hale and healthy and carrying on his life as Reverend and Correspondent of seven schools. The real dispute between them was the attitude of the Petitioner/wife who always used to frequently visit her parents house without information and consent. The parents of the appellant/wife are making hindrance to their reunion.

3.The Court below on considering the evidence of the Petitioner/wife and the evidence of the husband/Respondent and the documents relied on either side, found that the allegation about the health condition of the respondent not proved. The allegation regarding creulty and physical assault not substantiated by documentary evidence. Hence the Petition for divorce was dismissed vide order, dated 26.11.2028. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed and pending for consideration for nearly six years. In the meanwhile, the respondent had thought it fit to file an application for restitution of conjugal rights and had preferred I.D.O.P.No.132/2019, on the file of Family Court, Tirunelveli. The wife in turn had filed Domestic Violence Act Petition No.14 of 2019 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirunelveli.While the Petition filed by the respondent husband for restitution of conjugal rights dismissed for default on 5.1.2021, it appears that DVA Case is still pending. The case details would show that DVA case has been adjourned time to time and thereafter referred to mediation through Lok Adalat, but the same failed.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the respondent husband submit