P. THANKAM Vs. C.K. MADHAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree passed in Original Petition No. 63 of 2005, on the files of the Family Court, Kalpatta. The appellant was the petitioner in the said Original Petition and he is the husband of the respondent. He filed the aforesaid Original Petition under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), seeking a decree dissolving the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent. The brief facts of the case averred in the Original Petition can be summarised as follows:

(2.) The respondent filed a counter-statement, admitting the marital relationship and the parentage of the children born out of the wedlock. But, she emphatically denied all the allegations of mental cruelty and desertion alleged against her. She denied the allegation that she made an attempt to kill him by poisoning food and it is a false story, according to her. The averment in the petition that she left the house 27.02.2001, without the consent or knowledge of the petitioner is absolutely false. They were living together from 1986 onwards in the Water Authority quarters at Sultanbathery and during that period she was subjected to cruelty by the petitioner. Very often he bodily assaulted her and at one occasion she was admitted in hospital for the same. From 1986 onwards, the petitioner was taking food from the house and he abandoned her. The petitioner has constructed a house using the money obtained from selling of his property at Sultanbathery. The petitioner refused to maintain her, though she was unable to maintain herself and the children. Thus, he completely neglected and deserted the respondent. She filed Maintenance Case before the Family Court and obtained an order directing the petitioner to pay maintenance allowance to her. In 2004, the petitioner purchased 15 cents of land in the name of one 'Rajani' and now he is residing with the said 'Rajani'. She prayed for granting an amount of Rs. 6,000/- per month, as alimony, if the petition is allowed. However, she prayed for dismissal of the petition.

(3.) On the aforesaid rival pleadings, both parties adduced oral evidence, as PW.1 and RW.1 respectively and the petitioner has produced Exts.A1 to A5 and respondent has produced Ext.B1. On an appraisal of the aforesaid evidence, the Family Court decreed the Original Petition, by granting a decree dissolving the marriage under Section 13(1) (ib) of the Act. The legality and correctness of the findings whereby the Family Court granted decree dissolving the marriage, are assailed in this appeal.