MEENAKSHI Vs. PREMKUMAR NACHIAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has come forward with these appeals aggrieved by the common Degree and Judgment dated 10.01.2007 passed by the learned I Additional Family Court Judge, Chennai in FCOP Nos. 440 of 2005 and 910 of 2006. While FCOP No. 440 of 2005 was filed by the respondent-husband for grant of a decree of divorce, FCOP No. 910 of 2006 was filed by the appellant herein under Section 9 of The Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. After considering the rival claim, the Family Court by the said common order dated 10.01.2007 allowed the Original Petition filed by the respondent/husband and granted a decree of divorce while dismissing the Original Petition filed by the appellant/wife for restitution of conjugal rights.

(2.) The respondent herein has filed FCOP No. 440 of 2005 by contending that the marriage between him and the appellant was solemnised as per Hindu rites and customs on 01.07.1999 at Kilapungudi, Sivagangai District. The marriage was arranged by the elders in the family and it was also registered in the office of the Registrar of Marriage, Madagupatti under Certificate No.8 of 1999 dated 02.07.1999. According to the respondent, he was working in United States of America prior to the marriage and had come down to India for the purpose of marrying the appellant. After ten days of marriage, the respondent went to United States of America while the appellant joined him at United States of America during August 1999. The appellant was a holder of Engineering Degree and she was keen to pursue higher studies at United States of America. Therefore, the respondent got her admission for pursuing M.E. Degree in Computer Software Engineering at Widner University during January 2000. That apart, the respondent also obtained sponsorship to financially support her to pursue higher studies in the said University.

(3.) It is the contention of the respondent that he had a normal and happy married life with the appellant for about 3 to 5 months after marriage. According to the respondent, few years before marriage, the mother of the appellant died and her father re-married in the middle of 2000, which, according to the respondent, had apparently disturbed the appellant very much and the respondent witnessed a change in her behaviour pattern thereafter. The appellant started picking up quarrel with the respondent even for trivial family dispute and was in the habit of throwing whatever articles she could get into her hand. On one occasion, the appellant got annoyed and threw the shoes on the respondent. During yet another quarrel, the appellant threw the sacred thali towards the respondent, which has caused acute mental disturbance to him. At the height of her frustration, on one occasion, the appellant took a knife and threatened the respondent that she would cut her wrist and throw the blame on him. The appellant also made constant threat to dial the emergency police number '911' at United States of America, have the respondent arrested for domestic violence by hurting herself and to throw the blame on him. During the middle of 2002, owing to a trivial quarrel, the appellant became very aggressive that she had taken a knife and threatened to commit suicide. When the respondent attempted to snatch the knife from her, the appellant cut his finger and therefore, he had to be taken to Spring Field Hospital for treatment where he was sutured as the cut injury was so deep. According to the respondent, the fact that he had very close proximity with his father, mother and grand parents and sister had apparently irked the appellant that she could not make any such bond with any one of her relatives, particularly her parents. Further, the appellant constantly apprehended that she was genetically pre-diagnosed to cancer inasmuch as her mother died due to the said disease. At the same time, the appellant blamed that the respondent did not sympathise with her for her imagined and non-existing disease.