Advocates:
['M/S K HEMAKARTHIKEYAN', '', 'S Alagu Sangeetha', 'M/S K RENGANATHAN']

C.M.S.A.(MD)No.11 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved On : 01.08.2022

Delivered On : 25.08.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. THARANI

C.M.S.A.(MD)No.11 of 2022

M.Subramaniyan

.. Appellant /Appellant/ Petitioner

Vs.

S.Latha

.. Respondent / Respondent / Respondent

Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 29 of the Hindu

Marriage Act r/w. Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the

judgment and decree, dated 15.03.2021, made in H.M.C.M.A. No.20 of 2020, on

the file of the Principal District Judge, Theni, by confirming the judgment and

decree, dated 29.07.2020, made in H.M.O.P.No.5 of 2018, on the file of the Sub

Court, Theni.

For Appellant

: Mr.K.Hema Karthikeyan

For Respondent

: Mr.K.Renganathan

JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal has been filed against the

judgment and decree, dated 15.03.2021, made in H.M.C.M.A. No.20 of 2020, on

the file of the Principal District Judge, Theni by confirming the judgment and

1 / 14

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

C.M.S.A.(MD)No.11 of 2022

decree, dated 29.07.2020, made in H.M.O.P.No.5 of 2018, on the file of the Sub

Court, Theni. The appellant herein is the petitioner - husband and the

respondent herein is the respondent-wife.

2.Brief substance of the petition in H.M.O.P.No.5 of 2018, is as follows:

2.1. The petitioner is an Ex-service man. The marriage between the

petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 11.06.1993 at Sethumaravar

marriage hall at Bodinaykanur, Theni District. The respondent was not gifted

with any jewels, at the time of marriage. After five years of marriage, the parents

of the respondent gave 6 ½ sovereigns to the respondent and they gifted

Sridhana articles worth about Rs.25,000/-. The jewels and the articles are in the

custody of the respondent. They lived in Gwalior, Mathyapradesh. When ever

the petitioner used to converse in Hindi language, the respondent used to suspect

him and used to quarrel with him. She failed to do her matrimonial obligations.

They were blessed with one son on 15.06.1994, viz., Muneeswaran. The

petitioner was then transferred to Mumbai and they lived there from the year

1996. The respondent suspect every word and deed of the petitioner. They were

blessed with the second son viz., Ramkumar, on 25.05.1999. Then the petitioner

was transferred to Gahauti, Assam and they lived there from the year 2001

till 2003.

2 / 14

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

C.M.S.A.(MD)No.11 of 2022

2.2. The respondent suspect the petitioner and obstructed him from

doing his duty and because of the attitude of the respondent, the petitioner was

not able to concentrate on his work and he got Voluntary Retirement from the

military service. Due to the harassment of the respondent, the petitioner was

made to work as a watchman instead of serving in the military. After retirement,

they lived in a rental premises in Bodinaykanur. Due to the nature of the

respondent, the landlord asked them to vacate the premises. Later in the year

2006, the petitioner purchased a plot with the help of Bank loan and constructed

a housed in the year 2013. When the petitioner was struggling with the

repayment of loan, the respondent continued to fight with him for one reason or

the other.

2.3. She demanded to transfer the ownership of the house to her name.

Considering the welfare of the children, the petitioner transferred the house

property in her name. In order to repay the bank loan, the respondent disposed

of the house property without the knowledge of the petitioner and she closed the

Bank loan. Once again, they were made to reside in a rental premises. The

respondent used to remove and throw away the sacred Thali and she used to go

out of the matrimonial home. The petitioner had to trace out and bring her back

3 / 14

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

C.M.S.