SHRI RAYMOND LANCY RODRIGUES Vs. YOGITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this family court appeal, the appellanthusband challenges the judgment of the learned District Judge 7, Nagpur, dated 07.09.2013 dismissing a petition filed by the appellant under Sec. 10(1)(ix) and (x) of the Divorce Act, 1869.

(2.) The appellant husband and the respondent wife were married at Sadar, Nagpur as per the Christian custom on 01.10.2003. The appellant was originally from Shirthadi, Mangalore, in the State of Karnataka and the respondent was a resident of Nagpur. The parties resided together for some time at Nagpur after the marriage. A son named Marshall was born from the wedlock. At the relevant time, the appellant was serving with the government in Nagpur and after his retirement on 31.08.2008, the appellant started residing at Shirthadi. According to the appellant, the respondent's behaviour was objectionable since the inception of the marriage. It is pleaded by the appellant in the petition filed by him for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion that the respondent did not show any love and affection towards him. It is pleaded that the respondent was in the habit of developing illicit relationship with strangers despite strong objection of the appellant. It is pleaded that the respondent used to frequently quarrel with the appellant and also assault him on some occasions. It is pleaded that the respondent was in the habit of going to her parental home unnecessarily without the permission of the appellant. It is pleaded that in Oct. 2005, the respondent went to her parental home for the delivery of the child and did not return to the matrimonial home. It is pleaded that the parties were living separately for more than two years when the petition was filed in the month of April 2009 and the appellant was entitled to a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion. It was pleaded that the respondent would abuse the appellant in filthy language and sometimes assault the appellant with iron rod and stick. It is pleaded that when the appellant was asleep in the bedroom, the respondent used to bring the cooking gas cylinder in the bedroom with a view to injure the life of the appellant. It is pleaded that sometimes the respondent used to try to inflict serious injuries on the appellant with the knife. It is pleaded that the acts on the part of the respondent resulted in the deterioration of the health of the appellant and he suffered from heart problem. It is pleaded that the marriage between the parties is irretrievably broken down and the appellant is, therefore, entitled to a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion.

(3.) The respondent filed the written statement and denied the claim of the appellant. Every adverse allegation that was made by the appellant against the respondent was denied by the respondent. It is pleaded by the respondent in the specific pleadings that the marriage between the parties was settled by the consent of the parties and at the relevant time, the appellant was working as a professor in the Hislop college. It is pleaded that the appellant was addicted to liquor and under the influence of liquor, he used to compare the respondent with his two former wives and used to abuse and insult her. It is pleaded that the appellant used to fight with the respondent on trivial issues and used to beat her in the fit of anger. It is pleaded that in the presence of public, the appellant used to insult her by saying that she cannot give birth to a child. It is pleaded that when the uncle of the respondent expired in April, 2005, the appellant quarrelled with the respondent and objected to her visit to her uncle's place. It is pleaded that the appellant used to abuse the respondent in filthy language in the presence of his students and used to say that the respondent was his daughter and not his wife. It is pleaded that the appellant sent the respondent to her parental home when she was in the seventh month of the pregnancy and never came to take back the respondent to the matrimonial home after the child was delivered. It is pleaded that after the maternal aunt of the respondent dropped her to the matrimonial home, the appellant used to leave the matrimonial home and remain out of the house for four to five days and also granted leave to his servants during the days when he was out of the house. It is pleaded that the appellant used to misbehave with the maidservant whom he had engaged for performing his body massage. It is pleaded that after the retirement of the appellant, the parties started residing in Kashi Patna village of Mangalore. It is pleaded that the appellant used to keep the respondent and the son alone in the house which was located in a forest. It is pleaded that the appellant resided with the respondent till the month of March, 2009 and in April, 2009, he dropped the respondent to the railway station to reach her to Nagpur. It is pleaded that since the respondent had neither treated the appellant with cruelty nor had the parties separated for two years, a decree of divorce should not be granted in favour of the appellant.