P N SURESH Vs. NISHA RAVEENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the husband of the respondent. The respondent filed OP 30/2005 on the files of the Family Court, Kottayam seeking for a decree granting divorce on the grounds under Sec.13 (1) (i), (ia) and (ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The parties are referred to as in the original petition. According to the petitioner, her marriage with the respondent was solemnized as per the Hindu customary rites and ceremonies at Sreekrishna Swamy Temple at Thodupuzha on 19.8.2001 and a child was born to them on 7.5.2002. At the time of marriage, the petitioner was wearing gold ornaments weighing 36 sovereigns and Rs 75,000/- was given to the respondent in connection with the marriage. Immediately after the marriage she came to know that, prior to the marriage, the respondent had illicit connection with one Mini. When the petitioner questioned the above relationship, the respondent has become violent and admitted the illicit affair with the said Mini. The petitioner and his mother treated her with cruelty. She was not getting proper food from the house of the respondent. The respondent on several occasions manhandled the petitioner, even during the time of pregnancy. The respondent did not co-operate with the petitioner during the period of pregnancy and delivery. The respondent's mother and sister had come to the hospital to visit the petitioner after the delivery and they quarreled with her. The respondent had neglected to look after the affairs of the petitioner while she was in hospital after delivery. The respondent's father was suffering from mental illness and he made an attempt to kill the petitioner. The parents of the petitioner came and taken her to their house. Thereafter, the petitioner had gone for a job in a hospital at Kanjirappally. But, the respondent had come there and quarreled with her and subsequently she had lost the said job due to the scene created by the respondent in the hospital. Though, at the initiative of the petitioner's parents, the respondent had taken a separate house and stayed there, there was no change in the attitude of the respondent towards the petitioner and he continued illicit relationship with the said Mini. On 10.7.2003 when the petitioner reached the house of Mini she found respondent and Mini in a compromising position and thereafter the respondent has made an attempt to kill the petitioner by pouring kerosene and she escaped from the place. The respondent has converted from Hinduism to Christianity and compelled the petitioner also to convert to Christianity. When she declined the same, the respondent manhandled her. When the cruelty towards the petitioner became intolerable she was compelled to leave the house of the respondent. Thereafter she came to know that the respondent is leading an immoral life and maintaining illicit relationship with the said Mini. With the aforesaid averments the petitioner prayed for a decree granting divorce on the ground of cruelty, adultery and conversion to another religion.

(2.) The respondent filed objection denying the averments in the petition. He admitted that Rs 75,000/- was entrusted with the father of the respondent. The petitioner had 25 sovereigns of gold ornaments. According to the information given by the petitioner herself, he denied the allegations of illicit relationship with Mini and according to him it is a false story. The said Mini is a fictitious lady only. The allegations of cruelty levelled against the parents of the respondent was also denied. According to him, he and his parents and sisters treated the petitioner with love, affection and utmost care. But the petitioner's parents behaved indecently to them. He has not created any scene in the hospital, where the petitioner was working. The petitioner has not allowed the mother and sister of the respondent to take the child. The father of the respondent is not a person of unsound mind as contended by the petitioner. The petitioner was always interested in picking quarrels with the respondent and his parents. The petitioner quarrelled with the respondent on 10.7.2003 and started to reside in the house of her aunt at Kanjirappally. He has not embraced Christianity after renouncing Hindu religion and he has not instigated or compelled the petitioner to convert to Christianity. The petitioner has wilfully deserted the respondent and she has gone with the child. The police had obtained some documents from the respondent by threat or coercion on the petition filed by the petitioner before the police authorities. Her mother wanted illicit relationship with him and when she failed in that attempt she is trying to destroy the marital relationship between the petitioner and the respondent. With the above contentions, the respondent prayed for dismissal of the petition.

(3.) On the aforesaid rival contentions, both parties adduced evidence which consists of oral testimony of PW1 to PW4 and RW1 and documentary evidence Exts A1 to A8 and B1 to B6(f). After considering the evidence on record, the Family Court passed the impugned order granting divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion only.