AMUTHA Vs. A.R. SUBRAMANIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal challenges the validity of the order dtd. 8/6/2018 passed by the Madras High Court's Madurai Bench in CMSA (MD) No. 34 of 2014 wherein the High Court allowed the appeal of the respondent - husband herein, thereby setting aside the judgments of the two lower Courts, and thus granting a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. The appellant herein is the wife challenging the grant of divorce.

(2.) The appellant and the respondent got married on 30/6/2002. At the time of their marriage, the respondent was employed as a software engineer in Punjab. After the marriage, the appellant moved to Chandigarh with the respondent and secured employment as an engineer in the same company as the respondent. The couple lived together for a few months, during which the appellant conceived a child. Subsequently, she returned to her parental home for the delivery of the child. On 9/7/2003, she gave birth to a female child. The respondent visited to see the child, but when he requested the appellant to return to the matrimonial home, she allegedly refused. Consequently, the respondent issued a legal notice for reunion on 29/12/2003, to which the appellant replied on 31/12/2003 with allegations against him. Thereafter, the respondent filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights in January 2004, pending which attempts at reconciliation through a panchayat failed.

(3.) During the pendency of the restitution petition, the appellant agreed to resume cohabitation and joined the respondent at his residence on 28/6/2004. The couple subsequently moved to Bengaluru, Karnataka, where they resided together. However, the respondent alleged that the appellant treated him with cruelty during this period. Eventually, the petition for restitution of conjugal rights was dismissed for default. The appellant once again left the matrimonial home allegedly without informing the respondent and returned to her parental home. The respondent claimed that this desertion, combined with the mental anguish caused by her absence during the demise of his father, amounted to cruelty. Consequently, the respondent filed a divorce petition in 2010 on the grounds of cruelty.