Dismissed

Ramakrishnan v. Leela

Kerala HC23 Aug 2017Mat.Appeal/876/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against a divorce decree, the High Court of Kerala dismissed the husband’s challenge. Upholding the Family Court’s finding of cruelty, the Court held the wife established physical and mental torture, including neglect during kidney surgery and repeated assaults.

What did the court decide?

The matrimonial appeal was dismissed; the Family Court’s order granting divorce to the wife was affirmed.

Ramakrishnan Vs Leela — Maintenance and Alimony | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2017/1ST BHADRA, 1939 Mat.Appeal.No. 876 of 2014 (D)

¶5

-------------------------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER IN OP(HM) 145/2012 of FAMILY COURT, THODUPUZHA DATED 31-05-2014

¶6

APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: -

¶7

RAMAKRISHNAN, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.KELA @ GOPALAN, NILAPPURAYIL HOUSE, KOOVAKANDAM.P.O., POOMALA KARA, VELLIYAMATTOM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G SRI.DIPU JAMES

¶9

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: -

¶10

LEELA, D/O GOVINDAN, AGED 63 YEARS, NILAPPURAYIL HOUSE, KOOVAKANDAN.P.O., POOMALA KARA, VELLIYAMATTOM VILLAGE, NOW RESIDING AT MANJAPPILLIL HOUSE, CHAKKAMPUZHA.P.O., VELLILAPPILLI VILLAE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶11

R1 BY ADV. SRI.ROY CHACKO R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.C.VINCENT

¶12

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

DMR/-

¶14

A.M.SHAFFIQUE & P. SOMARAJAN, JJ.

¶15

Mat. Appeal No.876 of 2014

¶16

Dated this the 23^rd day of August, 2017

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

P. Somarajan, J.

¶19

Aggrieved by the order dated 31.05.2014 in OP (HM) No.145/2012 of the Family Court, Thodupuzha, the respondent came up with this Matrimonial Appeal. The petitioner is the wife and the respondent is the husband and marriage between them was solemnized on 24.06.1984. The petition was submitted by the wife under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. The main allegation against the respondent was that he was very much interested in sex and always leading an errant and queer life style and used to assault the petitioner whenever it was questioned. He used to insult the petitioner in front of the friends and relatives by declaring that he is not at all satisfied with the petitioner. During the year 2012, the petitioner, wife, became a chronic Nephrosis patient and one of her kidney was removed at Medical College Hospital, Kottayam. At that time, no care and attention was given to her by her husband, the respondent, and he did not discharge

¶20

¶21

Mat. Appeal No.876 of 2014

¶22

his obligation as a husband. After the medical operation, the respondent continued his cruelty towards her by asking her to do her domestic work. After her retirement from service on 31.12.2010, the respondent declared that he did not want to continue the marital relationship with the petitioner. On 25.01.2012, the respondent brutally manhandled the petitioner in the presence of her sister and forced to leave her home and thereafter she is living separately. She had given oral evidence as PW1 in tune with what is alleged in the application. Though she was subjected to lengthy crossexamination, nothing was brought out to discredit her evidence. On the other hand, the respondent admitted the removal of one of her kidneys. She had also spoken about the cruel behaviour of respondent by assaulting her on so many occasions.

¶23

We have gone through the oral evidence tendered by PW1 as well as RW1. The oral evidence tendered by PW1 prima facie satisfies the way and the manner in which the respondent subjected her with cruelty. He had not given any attention at the time of her treatment in the hospital in connection with removal of one kidney. She had also testified

¶24

¶25

Mat. Appeal No.876 of 2014

¶26

with respect to the indecent behaviour, especially in the presence of her near relatives and friends. Her dignity and integrity as a legally wedded wife were also challenged on so many occasions. All these amounts to physical and mental cruelty. We are satisfied that the petitioner has succeeded in establishing the cruelty towards her by her husband and that she was subjected to physical torture on several times besides the mental torture and as such, we could not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Family Court, Thodupuhza.

¶27

Hence, this matrimonial appeal deserves only dismissal and we do so.

¶28

A.M.SHAFFIQUE (JUDGE)

¶29

P. SOMARAJAN (JUDGE)

¶30

DMR/-

Ramakrishnan v. Leela

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramakrishnan v. Leela

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kerala Agricultural University Vs Haritha K.P

N.Vasumathi Vs v.P.Valsan

G.K.Sumathy Vs Elizabath

Mr.Favas.K.a Vs the Superintendent of Police

Sam Madhavan Byshie Vs Jalaja Harshappan

Vanaja A.L. Vs State of Kerala