S SUBBULAKSHMI @ SUNITHA Vs. S SUBRAMANIAN @ SARAVANAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise out of a common order dated 20.12.2016 passed in HMOP Nos. 298 and 1025 of 2014 on the file of Additional Family Judge, Coimbatore. By the said Order dated 20.12.2016, the Family Court dismissed HMOP No. 298 of 2014 filed by the appellant/wife herein under Section 9 of The Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal right and allowed HMOP No. 1025 of 2014 filed by the respondent-husband under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, whereby the marriage solemnised between the appellant and the respondent on 25.06.2009 was declared as null and void.

(2.) The respondent herein has filed HMOP No. 3 of 2014 before the Family Court, Madurai under Section 11 of The HIndu Marriage Act (in short The Act) praying to declare the marriage solemnised between him and the appellant herein on 25.06.2009 at Star Park Kalyana Mandapam, Madurai as null and void. On receipt of notice in HMOP No. 3 of 2014, the appellant herein has filed HMOP No. 298 of 2014 before the Family Court, Coimbatore, under Section 9 of The Act for restitution of conjuugal rights. During the pendency of the aforesaid Original Petitions, the appellant herein has filed Tr.CMP No. 226 of 2014 before this Court to transfer HMOP No. 3 of 2014 on the file of Family Court, Madurai to the file of Family Court, Coimbatore so as to be tried along with HMOP No. 298 of 2014 filed by her. By order dated 24.07.2014, this Court allowed the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition transferring HMOP No. 3 of 2014 from the file of Family Court, Madurai to the file of Family Court, Coimbatore, so as to be tried along with HMOP No. 298 of 2014 filed by the appellant. On transfer, HMOP No. 3 of 2014 was re-numbered as HMOP No. 1025 of 2014.

(3.) The averments, based on which HMOP No. 3 of 2014 was filed by the respondent (HMOP No. 1025 of 2014) are that the marriage between him and the appellant was proposed to be solemnised and after deliberations among the elders of both sides, an engagement ceremony was performed on 04.06.2009 at Coimbatore, even though the native place of the appellant and her family is Ooty. Thereafter, on 25.06.2009, the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnised at Star Park Kalyana Mandapam, Madurai as per Hindu rites and custom in the presence of elders, friends and relatives of both sides. At the time of marriage, Thali Chain worth about 5 sovereigns and Mangalya Thali worth about 1 sovereign was presented to the appellant by the parents of the respondent. As per the custom, marriage expenses to the tune of Rs. 5 lakhs was spent by the father of the respondent. The marriage was also duly registered before the concerned Registrar of Marriage at Madurai. According to the respondent, after the marriage, the appellant did not evince keen interest in having sexual intercourse with him and thereby caused immense mental agony to him. When it was questioned by the respondent, the appellant replied that she is terribly tired due to the marriage ceremonies as well as subsequent events and therefore, the respondent did not take it seriously by then. After the marriage, the respondent and the appellant stayed together at the house of the respondent for a week. During such stay at Madurai, the appellant was not in her normal mood and most of the time, she kept herself aloof from the respondent and his family members. The appellant never attended to the domestic work and the respondent bonafidely believed that by passage of time, the appellant will be back to her normal behavioural pattern, as expected. At the time of marriage, the respondent was employed in London and therefore, to make necessary arrangements for getting visa to the appellant, the respondent came to Chennai along with the appellant and stayed in his sister's house. Even during such stay, the appellant exhibited improper and irrelevant behaviour without any valid reasons. Thus, from the date of marriage, the behaviour of the appellant was not proper, especially the appellant refused to have cohabitation with the respondent and thereby he was subjected to mental agony and hardship.