UMA MAHESH Vs. NETHRAVATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and order dated 18th December 2010, passed in M.C.No.241/ 2008, by the learned Judge, Family Court, Mysore, dismissing the petition filed by appellant, under Section 13(1 )(ia) and (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, on grounds of cruelty and desertion.

(2.) The brief facts of the case on hand as set out in the petition are that, the appellant and respondent are husband and wife and their marriage was solemnized on 4th May 2003, at Pandit Narayan Choultry, Mysore, as per the Hindu customs prevailing in their community. Thereafter, the respondent joined the company of the appellant and they lived together as husband and wife in the matrimonial home. The respondent lived with the appellant, till about two and a half years prior to filing of the petition.

(3.) Be that as it may, it is the specific case of the appellant that, when the respondent failed to beget children, she deserted him on her own will and volition and started staying in the house of her parents at Nanjangud and never bothered to return to the matrimonial home to lead marital life with him. It is the further case of the appellant that his wife is suffering from serious physical disorder pertaining to her reproductive system and in fact, she was subjected to thorough medical checkup and investigation by expert Doctors and according to the opinion of the Doctors, the respondent is unable to bear children and she is not exhibiting any signs of attaining age of puberty and not undergoing regular menstrual cycle every month. It is the allegation of the appellant that though the respondent and her parents were aware of the inherent defect suffered by the respondent, they have played fraud on him and through misrepresentation and suppression of the fact that, she had not attained puberty and not undergoing monthly menstrual cycle, performed her marriage with him, and thereby cheated him. Further, it is his case that the respondent from the day she joined him in the matrimonial home, started behaving in an indifferent manner and she used to show hostile attitude towards him and his family members and never treated him and his family members with love and affection. In fact, a panchayat was also convened in this regard and according to the appellant, the panchayatdars and other close relatives who were present in the panchayath have taken the respondent and her family members to task for having suppressed the inherent defect from which the respondent is suffering from and for performing her marriage with the appellant, by suppressing the said inherent defect. The appellant's further case is that the respondent and her mother suffered humiliation in the presence of the panchayatdars and having admitted the fact that her daughter had not attained puberty and not undergoing monthly menstrual cycle, admitted that she has suppressed that fact, while performing the marriage of the . respondent with the appellant. Further, the mother of the respondent took the respondent to her house on the date of the panchayat itself i.e. during December 2005 and since then, the respondent is staying with her mother in the house of her parents and there is no sort of any cohabitation between him and the respondent since then and the marital relationship between him and the respondent has been broken down, irretrievably and there is no chance and possibility of reunion or resumption of the marital relationship between them.