The High Court dismissed a second appeal in a divorce case. The lower courts rejected the husband's petition due to insufficient evidence of the wife's adultery and voluntary desertion, noting the lack of a notice sent by the husband before filing the suit.
The Second Appeal was dismissed and the judgments and decrees of the courts below were confirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 05.10.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
C.M.S.A.No.45 of 2008
Perumal Pillai ... Appellant/Appellant/ Petitioner
Vs. Meenakshi ... Respondent/Respondent/ Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed under Section 24 (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, against the Judgment and Decree of the Principal District Court at Villupuram dated 22.01.2008 in C.M.A.No.14 of 2006, confirming the Judgment and Decree of the Subordinate Judge's Court at Kallakurichi dated 06.09.2006 in H.M.O.P.No.21 of 2002.
For Appellant : M/s.Aiyshwarya For M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates For Respondent : Mr.K.A.Ramakrishnan ORDER
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the Judgment and Decree of the Principal District Court at Villupuram dated 22.01.2008 in C.M.A.No.14 of 2006, confirming the Judgment and Decree of the Subordinate Court at Kallakurichi dated 06.09.2006 in H.M.O.P.No.21 of 2002.
said fact, he advised the respondent wife, despite the same, the respondent wife continued her relationship with the said person and later, deserted the petitioner. Further, the respondent wife, in order to hide her illegal intimacy with the person Kaliyappillai Selvam, gave a complaint against the person Kaliyappillai Selvam at Kallakurichi Police Station in Crime No.579/2001 and it was registered under Section 376 and 506 (ii) I.P.C. Though the appellant/petitioner has requested the respondent wife to come and live with him, the respondent wife refused to live with him, and therefore, the appellant/petitioner filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.21 of 2002 on the file of Subordinate Court, Kallakurichi, seeking for divorce.
not chosen to made any appropriate person as a party to the proceedings to prove and establish his case. Moreover, it could be seen from the records that when the appellant has taken a stand that only the respondent wife had voluntarily deserted him and living separately for more than a year, he has not chosen to send any notice to the respondent wife before filing the divorce petition. Further, none of the evidences have proved that the appellant called the respondent wife to live with him, but, she voluntarily deserted him and living separately. So, in the absence of any material to show the illegal intimacy and desertion by the respondent wife, the petition for dissolving the marriage cannot be considered. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the Judgments of the Courts below.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS V)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
raja
To
1. The Principal District Judge,
Villupuram.
2. The Subordinate Judge,
Kallakurichi.
+1cc to M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates, Advocate, S.R.No.69064
+1cc to Mr.K.A.Ramakrishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.68997
C.M.S.A.No.45 of 2008
PPA(CO)
CS/08/08/2019
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the lower courts' dismissal of a divorce petition due to lack of evidence regarding adultery and desertion?
Whether the appellant proved that the respondent wife committed adultery or voluntarily deserted him for one year?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Perumal Pillai
Meenakshi
BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
