DORIS PADMAVATHY Vs. V CHRISTODASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference under Sections 10 and 17 of the Indian Divorce Act IV of 1869 made by the learned District Judge, Tiruchirapalli, for confirmation of the decree nisi granted by him dissolving the marriage between Doris Padmavathi (petitioner) and her husband v. Christodass (respondent ). We may state, at the outset, that the respondent has remained ex parte throughout, and that the petitioner seeks divorce on the ground specified in a clause of Section 10 of the act, namely, "adultery coupled with such cruelty as without adultery would have entitled her to divorce a mensa et thoro. "

(2.) THE facts are quite simple. In her petition, the petitioner states that she married the respondent on 15-9-1958, according to the rights of the Christian religion. Immediately after the marriage, the husband and wife lived together at Bhilai and later at Tiruchirapalli. The respondent was then transferred in 1961 to the Thermal station at the Neyveli Lignite Corporation. The respondent was in poor health and began to act in a cruel manner towards the petitioner, sometimes even using physical violence. She tolerated this, hoping that his conduct would improve, as also, his health. On 17-9-1966, the respondent was enraged at the refusal of the petitioner to give finance for a foreign trip, and he beat her and actually attempted to throttle her. On hearing her cries, her mother, who was in the next room, had to intervene, and save her, The petitioner apprehended actual danger to her life, and left the house of the respondent with her mother. On 19-11-1986, there was another assault by the respondent against the petitioner and the respondent even made an attempt to drag her to the street and to use physical violence.

(3.) IN addition to these averments of grave cruelty, the petitioner alleges that the respondent was leading an immoral life, that he deserted the petitioner, that he was suffering from venereal disease and that, after leaving her, the respondent has been living in adultery with one Elizabeth, daughter of Doraiappan, without lawful marriage.