M SANKAR Vs. DEVAKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are filed by the husband against the dismissal of his petition for divorce under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in FCOP. No. 203/2003 and against the decree for restitution of conjugal rights granted in favour of the wife passed in F. C. O. P. No. 47 of 2000.

(2.) THE parties were married in accordance with the Hindu Sastric Rites and caste and community customs on 30. 11. 1998 in Salem. They started their life at Kadathur. The wife was employed as a Clerk at the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank Ltd. , at Valasayur. For three months, the wife was going to Valasayur from Kadathur to attend to her official duties. The distance between Valasayur and Kadathur was 60 kms. She used to hand over her salary to the husband as soon as she received it. She became pregnant and travelling daily 60 kms in the early months of pregnancy was found difficult and the Doctor advised her not to travel such a long distance every day. So, both of them decided to take a house for rental at Valasayur. The husband informed her that he had no income and he is not a graduate. They paid a sum of Rs. 8,000/- towards advance for a house at Valasayur for a monthly rent of Rs. 450/ -. The said sum was paid by the wife. They started living in Valasayur from 14. 3. 1999. According to the wife, the husband made a demand for dowry of Rs. 50,000/- to start an independent business. The husband also had gone to the wife's office and told the bank President that she should resign her job. After the wife convinced him, he obliged her to continue the said job. Thereafter, he returned to Valasayur and both were living together. On 12. 6. 1999, the husband informed that he is going to Coimbatore due to some personal work. At that time, she was 7 months pregnant. Thereafter, inspite of repeated letters, he did not return. The child also died because of the mental stress caused to the wife on account of his desertion. In these circumstances, she filed the petition for restitution of conjugal rights.

(3.) THE husband in his counter denied all the allegations. According to him, he was treated very badly by his in-laws at Valasayur and his wife had also treated him badly because she was more educated than he was. According to him, he is entitled to divorce on the ground of desertion and cruelty.