NANDHINI Vs. POOVARASAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The wife who suffered a decree for divorce in HMOP.No. 323 of 2014 on the file of the Family Court, Dindigul, is on appeal.

(2.) The marriage took place on 24/1/2011 at Dindigul. Claiming that the wife left the matrimonial home even as early as on 3/2/2011 and did not return despite repeated requests by the husband and that she had committed acts of mental cruelty, by ignoring him and his parents and sharing their private life with her sisters, the husband sought for divorce. He originally filed an original petition before the Sub Court, Namakkal, in HMOP.No.51 of 2013. Pending the above petition, the wife launched the proceedings in HMOP.No.94 of 2013 on the file of the Sub Court, Dindigul, under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking restitution of conjugal rights. It appears that both the petitions were transferred to the Family Court, Dindigul, and re-numbered as HMOP.No.117 of 2014 (HMOP.No.94 of 2013) filed by the wife, under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking restitution of conjugal rights and HMOP.No.323 of 2014 (HMOP.No.51 of 2013) filed by the husband seeking divorce, under Sec. 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

(3.) A joint trial was ordered upon request of both the parties. At trial, however, the wife withdrew her petition in HMOP.No.117 of 2014 on 6/5/2014, by filing a memo. Though the said memo reads that the husband has withdrawn the original petition filed by him, it appears that the husband did not withdraw the original petition. However, the original petition filed by the wife was dismissed as withdrawn. Thereafter, the husband was examined as PW1 in his HMOP and Exs.P1 to P3 were marked. Though the husband who deposed as PW1, was cross-examined by the counsel for the wife, the wife did not choose to let in any further evidence. It appears that an endorsement was made by the counsel for the wife before the Family Court that she has no evidence. The Family Court, considering the evidence let in, granted divorce. It also observed that apart from committing mental cruelty, the wife has deserted the husband without any sufficient cause.