R SELVARAJ Vs. RAMALAKSHMI @ SHANTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts of the case is follows:

(2.) The learned Subordinate Judge, Tuticorin, considering the pleadings put forth on either side, oral and documentary evidence and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, held that the appellant has not proved the allegation of mental cruelty and dismissed H.M.O.P.No. 98 of 2003 filed by him and allowed H.M.O.P.No.115 of 2002 filed by respondent. Aggrieved against the said judgment and decree the appellant herein filed C.M.A.Nos.46 and 47 of 2003 before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge / Fast Track Court No II, Tuticorin. The Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge / Fast Track Court No II, Tuticorin by a judgment and decree dated 05.10.2005 in C.M.A.Nos.46 and 47 of 2005 allowed the C.M.A. Aggrieved against the same the respondent herein filed a C.M.S.A.(MD)Nos.21 and 22 of 2005 before this Court. By judgment dated 14.05.2011 this Court C.M.S.A.(MD)Nos.21 and 22 of 2005 remanded to the first appellant Court for fresh disposal after affording due opportunities to both parties. There after the The Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge / Fast Track Court No II, Tuticorin by a judgment and decree dated 110.2003 in C.M.A.Nos.46 and 47 of 2005 confirmed the judgment and decree of the Learned Subordinate Judge, Tuticorin. Aggrieved against the same the present Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant / husband.

(3.) At the time of admission of the second appeal the following substantial questions of law had been elicited by the counsel appearing for the appellant and substantial question of law was framed by this Court at the time of admission.:-