UNNI Vs. JAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Marriage is a sacrosanct relationship between a man and a woman. But unfortunately if the relationship is strained, one may some how or other find out reasons to get rid of his or her partner. This case is a classic example for the same. The husband who failed to get a decree for divorce against his wife filed this appeal challenging the order of the Family Court, Ernakulam dated 26.03.2005 in O.P. 895/2003.

(2.) The marriage of the appellant with the respondent was solemnized as per the rites and ceremonies of Hindu Marriage Act on 111.1995. A child was born to them in the wedlock. But the respondent/wife had treated him with cruelty and made his life miserable. She was not behaving well with him right from the inception of the marriage. She also deserted him without any reasonable cause. There were constant fights between them and on 18.5.1998 she had broken her thali chain and thrown towards him and left his company. Therefore, he was constrained to prefer the petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion, is the case of the appellant.

(3.) On the other hand though the respondent had admitted her marriage with the appellant/husband had denied the alleged incident on 18.5.1998 as well the allegations that she had deserted him and treated him with cruelty. But she contended that in fact she was presented with 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments and an amount of Rs. 20,000/- at the time of her marriage with the appellant. He appropriated the same and harassed her for more money. Her life with the appellant at her matrimonial home was miserable because of the habit of the appellant picking up quarrel with his brothers and so they were compelled to shift their residence to a rented building. However, he continued to ill treat her demanding an amount of Rs. 50,000/- but still they were residing together. During the month of January 1998 she was taken along with the child to her paternal house to attend the marriage of her brother. But he abandoned them there and did not care to take them back to his house. He failed to provide anything for the maintenance of herself and her child. While so in the year 1998 itself he left abroad without even intimating her. Thereafter, she preferred a claim for maintenance as M.C. No. 217/2003 and a petition as O.P. No. 333/2003 for recovery of money and value of her gold ornaments and she was compelled to do so as she had no source of income. Infuriated by the same imputing false allegations against her he preferred the Original Petition for divorce.