VALERIE THERESA PERSICH Vs. MERVYN ALOYSIUS PERSICH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION for judicial separation, custody of children and payment of maintenance to wife and children on the grounds of 'desertion and cruelty'.

(2.) THE respondent has filed a counter statement denying these allegations and contends that he was never in the habit of borrowing nor was he going to races. According to him he never used to beat his wife. At the behest of the petitioner, he left for Bombay with the intention of permanently settling there but since he could not get a job he returned. From Bombay he had sent presents for 'Christmas' to his wife and children in December, 1965. On his return he found that the petitioner had developed illicit intimacy with one Ronnie Rodrigues with whom she eloped. When she was reprimanded she prostrated before him and requested him to give her a chance to open a new leaf. Again in May, 1968 the petitioner was misbehaving indecently with a co -worker in the petitioner's office. When the petitioner was questioned she quarreled with the respondent. He submits that the petitioner is not maintaining the children properly due to her adulterous course of conduct. She was detaining the children with an ulterior motive. Of late, the petitioner has developed illicit intimacy with one Rajani Kantha Rao and therefore she is guilty of adultery and continues to lead an immoral life, thereby annoy the respondent mentally and has made the life for the respondent a total misery. Under these circumstances he states that the petitioner cannot invoke the clemency of this Court just to escape from her past and present misdeeds and adulterous life. Thus he prays for the dismissal of the petition.

(3.) BEFORE dealing with the various issues, I am bound to state that having regard to the young age of the parties who may not be in a position to fully understand the stresses and strains or the wear and tear of married life and who are likely to be more emotional even for trivial causes, I advised them to settle their differences, amicably and start leading a new life. For this purpose, I called them to my Chambers and advised them individually and together also. The husband was willing to take back his wife whereas the wife was somewhat stubborn and did not want to go back and started crying before me. This may be due to the deep rooted fear of the wife that any reunion could bring about more disaster contrary to what was given out as the evidence which is discussed below, will tend to show. I also called the children separately to ascertain their wishes. Both of them expressed their strong desire to be with the mother and did not at all want to go back to the father who according to them, never took care of them.