M PADMA Vs. V VEERAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal No. 25 of 2006 is filed challenging the order and decree dated 3.4.2006 made in H.M.C.M.A. No. 53 of 2005 on the file of I Addl. District Court, Tirunelveli reversing the order and decree dated 27.9.2005 made in H.M.O.P. No. 66 of 2003 on the file of I Addl. Subordinate Court, Tirunelveli.

(2.) Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal No. 26 of 2006 is filed challenging the order and decree dated 3.4.2006 made in H.M.C.M.A. No. 54 of 2005 on the file of I Addl. District Court, Tirunelveli reversing the order and decree dated 27.9.2005 made in H.M.O.P. No. 72 of 2003 on the file of I Addl. Subordinate Court, Tirunelveli.

(3.) The following are the allegations contained in the petition in H.M.O.P. No. 66 of 2003 by the respondent under Section 13 (ia) and (i)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act 25 of 1965. 3(a) The marriage of both the parties was solemnized as per the Hindu rites on 26.8.1987 at Meenakshi Chokkanathar Temple at Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District and the reception was held on 20.8.1987 at Somasundariammal Trust Kalyana Mandapam at Palayamkottai. During their living in Tamil Nadu Housing Board Colony, Maharaja Nagar, the wife's attitude towards the husband changed and she began to quarrel for no reason besides making baseless allegations against the husband. She went away and after exchange of notices and after intervention of Ex-Speaker Chellapandian, a compromise was made and thereafter they lived together. 3(b) The husband obtained loan and purchased Plot No. 61, N.G.O. New Colony and constructed a house. Both the parties moved to the new house. The wife started quarreling and began to suspect him without any basis. She also abused him as impotent, drunkard and womanizer. Her behaviour totally changed and she looked like a psyche. When the husband met his mother or sister, she began to abuse him in filthy language stating that he has illicit intimacy with them. She refused to cook or provide food. In November 1998, she threw away the bed and locked the door and directed him to live in the upstairs and she never resumed for cohabitation. 3(c) She is working as a scientific assistant in Forensic Laboratory in Tirunelveli Medical College. She did not disclose her income and how she spents but insisted him to give all his earnings and wished that he should not maintain his parents. In January 1999, she came to the upstairs portion and demanded him to transfer the house in her name. She refused to perform her marital obligations and duties for the past three years. She has willfully neglected and deserted the petitioner. She continued to be a sadistic woman without any affection towards him and is always causing mental agony to him. Now, the relationship totally impaired beyond reproach. Hence, a decree may be passed dissolving the marriage which took place between the parties on 26.8.1987 by a decree of divorce.