VENKATASUBRAMANI Vs. SREEMATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the Judgment dated 20/7/2004 made in F.C.O.P.No.280 of 2003 on the file of II Additional Family Court, Chennai dismissing the Petition filed by the Appellant-husband under Sec.13(1) (i-b) of Hindu Marriage Act. Unsuccessful husband is the Appellant.

(2.) The marriage between the Appellant and Respondent was solemnized on 10.03.1991 in Chennai as per Hindu rites and customs. Out of lawful wedlock, two children one son and one daughter were born. Case of Appellant is that after the marriage, Respondent-wife was in the habit of leaving the matrimonial home and that she insisted for setting up a separate matrimonial home. For delivering the first child, she went to her parents house and she did not return back to the matrimonial house and during the month of July 1994, she left for her parents house without any reason and stayed for more than eight months. At the intervention of Police, she resumed cohabitation. Appellant has alleged that Respondent has attempted to burn her saree in gas stove and attempted to commit suicide and on another occasion, she poured kerosene on the body of the Appellant and always alleging as if the Appellant has been demanding dowry from her. On 28.02.1996, Respondent left the matrimonial house without informing the Appellant. Without any reasonable cause, Respondent deserted the Appellant and hence Petition under Sec.13(1) (i-b) of Hindu Marriage Act was filed seeking dissolution of marriage.

(3.) Denying the averments in the Petition, Respondent/wife filed counter contending that for 'Thaali Piritchu Korthal' function, she went to her parents house. Case of Respondent is that after delivery of first child in November 1992, she stayed in her parents house for eleven months. Since the child was a premature baby and he was suffering from ill-health and therefore, she was compelled to stay in her parents house for about eleven months. Respondent has averred that she was compelled to live in Appellant's sister's house where she was forced to do all the household works and only during night time, Appellant used to take her back. Stating that she never insisted for separate residence, Respondent filed counter praying for dismissal of the Petition for divorce.