K K RAVEENDRAN Vs. P SUJATHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HUSBAND is the appellant. His application for divorce on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act was dismissed by the Family Court.

(2.) ACCORDING to the appellant/husband, the marriage had taken place on 25.9.1988. The birth of the child took place on 10.5.1989. It is the case of the appellant/husband that the child born to the respondent/wife was not his child. The child birth had taken place 228 days after the marriage. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the wife had asserted that the child was not a child born to the appellant and it is thereafter that the parties started residing separately.

(3.) WHEN this appeal came up for hearing, there is no representation for the respondent. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the parties have now been residing separately ever since the birth of the child i.e.10.5.1989. An attempt has been made to settle the dispute harmoniously. Such attempts have not succeeded as the whereabouts of the respondent could not be traced. Attempts are continuing. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant may be given one more opportunity to adduce further evidence in support of his claim for divorce on the ground of cruelty. If further opportunities are granted, the appellant shall adduce proper evidence to prove the allegations of cruelty. Evidence of matrimonial cruelty meted out to the appellant by the respondent by her conduct as well as proof that she had given birth to a child not in the relationship with the appellant can also be adduced, it is submitted.