RAJENDRA KUMAR Vs. C T CHITRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has come up with this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal aggrieved by the Order dated 18.04.2013 passed in OP No. 1305 of 2006 on the file of III Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai, dismissing the Original Petition filed by him for dissolution of the marriage solemnised with the respondent on 10.05.1998.

(2.) As per the averments contained in OP No. 1305 of 2006 filed by the appellant, the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnised on 10.05.1998 at C.V. Shah Bhavan, Rirtherdon Road, Purasawalkam, Chennai - 600 007 according to Hindu rites and customs in the presence of elders, friends and relatives of both sides. At the time of marriage, the appellant was employed in Hyderabad, therefore, after the marriage, the appellant and the respondent went to Hyderabad and started the matrimonial life at the house of the appellant at No.37, Samrat Colony, West Marred Pally, Secunderabad. According to the appellant, his married life with the respondent was not blissful and peaceful from the date of commencement of the matrimonial journey. It is his case that the respondent was always a trouble maker and she used to quarrel with the appellant even for trivial reasons. It is the specific case of the appellant that the respondent demanded the appellant to shift the matrimonial home to her parents house so that they could live along with her parents. Such a demand made by the respondent was not accepted by the appellant and therefore, frequent quarrel emanated between the couple. Further, the respondent often interacted with her parents and they unnecessarily interfered with the matrimonial life of the appellant with the respondent.

(3.) The appellant would further contend that the respondent did not like his parents, sisters or relatives to visit the matrimonial home and whenever they visit, she insulted them in some form or the other and made their visit an unpleasant one. Further, the respondent refused to accompany the appellant whenever he wanted to go to Chennai to meet his parents. Above all, whenever the appellant conversed with his parents over phone, the respondent, soon after such conversation, confronted the appellant as if the appellant's father wanted the appellant to extend some financial assistance and that the appellant, without the consent of the respondent, is helping his father financially. According to the appellant, his father never sought for any financial assistance from him and the respondent was in no mood to accept whatever explanation that was offered by the appellant in this direction. Even otherwise, in the absence of any request made by his father for any financial assistance, as a son, he has a pious obligation to assist his father financially and that cannot be prevented by the respondent. It is also stated by the appellant that the respondent never permitted him to converse with his neighbours, friends, female colleagues working with him in the office and she suspected the fidelity of the appellant. Further, the respondent compared the earnings of the appellant with that of her brother in law and used to nag and torment him to purchase two flats in Hyderabad and this has caused rift in the matrimonial relationship between the appellant and the respondent. Above all, the respondent used to wakeup in the morning at 8.00 am and she never attended to any domestic work in the house. It was the appellant who was made to attend all the domestic work in the house besides attending to his work in the office. There are occasions when the appellant was compelled to take food outside and it resulted in deterioration of his health. It is the further case of the appellant that during a petty quarrel, the respondent shouted at top of her voice and abused him in filthy language.