T JOHNSON Vs. RAJESWARY ALIAS AMBIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are preferred against the judgment in O.P.Nos.421/1995 and 468/1997 of Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. O.P.No.421/1995 was filed by the husband against his wife for divorce on the ground of adultery. Subsequently, it was amended by inserting the prayer for divorce on the ground of desertion. Appellant is the husband and respondent is the wife in these appeals. The petitioner's case in the trial court was that he married the 1st respondent as per Christian rites at CSI Church, Aramada, on 17.8.1983. In the wedlock, a male child was born to them on 11.7.1984. Subsequently, the relationship between the petitioner and the 1st respondent became strained and on 25.7.1986, the 1st respondent left the company of the petitioner and is living separately. After separation, the 1st respondent preferred O.S.No.126/1987 for maintenance before Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram and the suit was decreed directing the petitioner to pay maintenance of 200/ - per month to the 1st respondent. Before filing the above O.S., she filed M.C. No.54/1986 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Neyyattinkara under Section 125 Cr.P.C., wherein an order was passed for payment of maintenance to the child. The petitioner contended that he got information that the 1st respondent is living in adultery with the 2nd respondent. In the circumstances, he approached the Family Court for a decree of divorce or in the alternative to pass a decree of judicial separation on the ground of adultery and desertion.

(2.) THE 1st respondent resisted the above contention in the trial Court and contended that when they were residing together, the petitioner demanded huge amount from her and pledged all the gold ornaments of the 1st respondent. Thereafter, he ill -treated her both mentally and physically. Subsequently, on 25.7.1986, she was hospitalized due to ruthless assault of the petitioner and residing separately. She has no illicit relationship with the 2nd respondent. According to the 1st respondent, the petitioner is leading an immoral life and therefore, it is difficult to reside with him. The 2nd respondent also denied the illegal relationship with the 1st respondent and contended that the 1st respondent is his close relative and therefore, he is an unnecessary party in this case.

(3.) O .P.No.468/1997 was filed by the petitioner for cancellation of judgment and decree in O.S.No.126/1987 of Munisff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram and other reliefs. The petitioner contended that after the birth of a male child on 11.7.1984, the 1st respondent deserted him and started living separately. Thereafter, she filed M.C.No.54/1986 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Neyyattinkara and an order was passed in that M.C.to pay maintenance allowance at the rate of 100/ - per month to the child. In addition to the above M.C., she filed O.S.No.126/1987 before the Additional Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram in which the petitioner was directed to pay an amount of 200/ - per month to the 1st respondent. It is the petitioner, who deserted her and she has no other source of income to meet her requirements. The maintenance amount awarded is insufficient for her day -to -day livelihood. Therefore, there is no ground to set aside the decree in O.S.126/1987, she filed a counter claim for enhancing the maintenance amount. The petitioner also filed a replication with regard to the counter claim.