C.M.A.No.1989 of 2016

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15.09.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

AND

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI

C.M.A.No.1989 of 2016

and

C.M.P.No.14352 of 2016

Dhanalakshmi

...Appellant

Vs.

1.A.Thangarasu

2.V.Palanisamy

...Respondents

Prayer

: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family

Courts Act, against the fair and final order dated 14.12.2015 passed in

H.M.O.P.No.133 of 2014 on the file of the Family Court, Erode.

For Appellant

: Mr.M.Karthik

for Mr.I.C.Vasudevan

For Respondents

: Mr.M.Guruprasad for R1

R2 - No appearance

********

1/14

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

C.M.A.No.1989 of 2016

J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.)

The wife is on appeal. Challenge is to the decree for divorce

granted by the Family Court, Erode in HMOP.No.133 of 2014

(HMOP.No.36 of 2013 on the file of the Sub-Court, Erode).

2. The husband sought for divorce on the ground of adultery as

well as cruelty under Section 13(1)(i) and 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage

Act. The marriage was solemnized on 23.05.1996. Two male children were

born from the marriage. The first son born in 1997 was studying in plus one

and the second son born in 1998 was studying IX Standard, at the time

when the divorce was sought for. The husband would allege that the wife

entertained a superiority feeling and was continuously ill-treating him and

his family members. He would further plead that on her compulsion he had

to establish a separate residence for himself, thereby forcing him to ignore

his parents.

2/14

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

C.M.A.No.1989 of 2016

3. It is his further case that the wife also had extra marital

relationship with the 2^nd respondent in the original petition and when she

was caught while being with the 2^nd respondent in a temple, she left the

matrimonial house on 27.03.2012 and did not choose to come back. Not

stopping there, she brought her brother Nesamani and her cousin

Chinnasamy and they beat up the husband. The husband would also allege

that the wife had in fact threatened to kill him after her brothers marriage

takes place. Claiming that the actions of the respondent/ wife amounted to

adultery as well as cruelty the husband sought for divorce.

4. This petition was resisted by the wife contending that the claim

made in the divorce petition is false. According to her, the husband did not

have proper income and he was addicted to alcohol. His father was also

addicted to alcohol and he misbehaved with her. It was because of such

misbehaviour by the father that they started living in the house belonging to

the mother of the husband. It is also her contention that the house was

repaired, to make it fit for living, by the father of the wife. The wife would

further plead that her father has gifted her 25 sovereigns of jewels and had

3/14

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

C.M.A.No.1989 of 2016

paid a dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- apart from buying a TVS-50 Moped for the

husband. She would also contend that the husband did not have any

separate income and he was only doing agriculture in his father's lands.

She would also contend that the husband was doubting her character and

was ill-treating her because of the said doubt. It is also her contention that

the husband had taken away jewels and pledged them in the cooperative

bank and since he could not redeem the jewels, her father had redeemed the

jewels and he is in possession of those receipt for redemption also.

5. The 2^nd respondent filed a counter denying all the allegations.

He had said that he is related to the husband and he is doing agriculture and

it is out of political ill-will the petition has been filed by the husband. He

has also stated that the plea of adultery was only made to strengthen the case

for divorce.

6. On the above pleadings the Family Court framed the