DR. MANIMARAN Vs. DR. NALINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals arise out of a common Order dated 04.03.2017 passed by the learned II Additional Principal Judge, Chennai in OP Nos. 2804 of 2012 and 3964 of 2012. By the said Order dated 04.03.2017, the Family Court dismissed OP No. 2804 of 2012 filed by the husband/appellant under Section 13 (1) (i-a) of The Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage, while allowing the OP No. 3964 of 2012 filed by the wife/respondent herein under Section 9 of the said Act for restitution of conjugal rights. Therefore, both these appeals are taken up together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as appellant and respondent as per their litigative status in this appeal.

(3.) The case of the appellant, as could be unfolded from the averments made in OP No. 2804 of 2012 filed by him under Section 13 (1) (i-a) of The Hindu Marriage Act, is that when the appellant and the respondent were pursuing their Medical Degree in Chengalpet Medical College in the year 1997, they were in love with each other. Subsequently, the appellant and the respondent got married on 03.06.1999 and it was registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Perambur. Thereafter, the appellant wanted to perform a formal marriage in the presence of his parents, but the respondent disagreed and got agitated by stating that the parents of the appellant could not do anything as the marriage has already taken place. However, the appellant convinced the respondent and a formal marriage was performed on 28.11.1999. According to the appellant, after the marriage, the matrimonial home was set up at No.30, Malayan Street, Tenkasi. In the year 1999, the appellant got appointed to Government Medical Service and was posted in Tenkasi Primary Health Centre where the respondent also started her medical practice. On 03.11.2000, the respondent gave birth to a male child named Aswin Karthik. Prior to the birth of the child and also after birth, the respondent stayed with her parents in Ranipettai, Vellore District and this separation for about 8 months, according to the appellant, has widened the relationship between the appellant and the respondent. After the respondent returned to the matrimonial home, the appellant expressed his intention to continue his higher studies and to prepare for competitive examination after his regular working hours. Though appellant was earning out of his employment in government service, the respondent wanted him to concentrate in private practice ignoring his higher studies and thereby the respondent wanted to make huge money. Such attitude of the respondent, according to the appellant, was not to his liking. In fact, the respondent discouraged the appellant from pursuing his higher studies and also used abusive words about his earning capacity. Such an attitude on the part of the respondent has resulted in loss of mental peace and resultantly, the appellant could not succeed in the competitive examination held during the year 2002. In such a situation, the appellant had taken leave from his employment, kept himself away from the respondent and prepared for the competitive examination and ultimately he succeeded in securing 19th rank in the examination and got selected in the year 2003.