ASHOK PYLO PEEDIYAKKAN Vs. RACHEL DAVID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS original petition is filed by a Christian husband seeking a decree of nullity of marriage with the respondent under Sections 18 and 29 of the Indian Divorce Act. The respondent appeared through Counsel and filed objections. But, when the case came up for trial, the respondent did not cross - examine the petitioner when he was examined as P.W. 1 and did not adduce any contra evidence.

(2.) THE petitioner married the respondent on 11.9.1994 at St. George Orthodox Cathedral, Trivandrum, in accordance with the Christian rites and ceremonies. A child is born in the wedlock. The petitioner has alleged that at the time of marriage, the respondent was employed in Delhi and one of the term of the marriage was that she will resign her job in Delhi and come and settle down in Kottayam to set up the matrimonial home with the petitioner. According to him, on the assurance given by the respondent and her parents, that she will resign her job at Delhi in order to settle down at Kottayam, he consented for the marriage. He has further contended that all his attempts to bring the respondent to Kottayam to reside with him have failed and the respondent has stated that she is not willing to resign her job in Delhi and reside with him in Kottayam. When he contacted her over phone, the respondent informed him that she is not interested in the marital relationship with him and she is taking steps to move the Delhi Court for divorce of the marriage. The petitioner also stated that he had filed a petition before the Family Court for restitution of conjugal rights and though by judgment dated 22.8.1996 in O.P. No. 766 of 1994, the Family Court allowed his petition for restitution of conjugal rights the respondent did not come and join him in spite of his repeated requests. He further contended that he gave his consent for the marriage on the assurance given by the respondent that she will live with him after the marriage, resigning her job in Delhi.