ANOOP V. Vs. GEETHA E.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the petitioner in O.P.No.940/2011 on the files of the Family Court, Kozhikode, challenging an order passed by the said court dismissing his petition for divorce. He married the respondent on 29.10.2000 as per Hindu religions rites and ceremonies. A child was born in the wedlock. They resided together for about nine years. Earlier there was an issue between the couple. It was contended that the wife was misbehaving to the petitioner and his family members and was very quarrelsome in nature. She did not take care of the child and when she was questioned she always threatened to commit suicide. She was taken to a Psychiatrist. But he informed that she had no illness and the problem was with reference to her character. In the year 2003, respondent quarreled with the petitioner and left to her own house. Later, he filed O.P.No.523/2003 seeking dissolution of marriage and the respondent filed M.C.No.3/2006. Subsequently, the case was compromised and the parties started living together. It is stated that for a short period there was no problem. In the meantime, petitioner's brother's wife and child had to come and reside with him and his mother on account of the fact that his brother suffered severe loss in his business. Respondent did not like the same and she behaved in a rude manner against the petitioner's brother's wife and his mother. She also entertained suspicion about the petitioner and his brother's wife. In May 2009, respondent quarreled with the petitioner and on the next day she was found missing from the house and on enquiry it was understood that she had reached her house with the child. Though he made several attempts to bring her back to the matrimonial home, she did not budge. He was not even permitted to see the child.

(2.) Respondent denied the allegations. According to her, the petitioner's mother and sisters were creating some problems. She used to tell that the respondent should vacate the house as and when demanded by her. On 17.4.2003 the petitioner had taken the respondent to her house and did not take her back. Thereafter, she received a petition for divorce which was later compromised. According to her, after the petitioner's brother's wife and children came, the petitioner was only looking after them. She was ready and willing to continue in the house and obey the petitioner and his family members. But the petitioner was not interested in it and she was sent to her house on 11.5.2009 and she abandoned her. Thereafter the petitioner had not visited her.

(3.) To prove the above case, PWs 1 to 3 were examined on the side of the petitioner and RW1 on the side of the respondent. Ext.A1 is the document relied on.