In a matrimonial dispute involving allegations of infidelity and denial of paternity, a DNA test refuted the husband's claim that the child was not his. The Madurai Bench dismissed the Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal against the orders upholding the denial of divorce seeking.
Allground of appeal dismissed with no costs awarded.
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.
CMSA(MD).No.40 of 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 15.10.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
CMSA(MD).No.40 of 2011
V. Manoharan .. Appellant/ Appellant /Petitioner
Vs.
Saranya ... Respondent/Respondent/Respondent
PRAYER : This Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed under Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act r/w. 100 CPC against the order dted 11.03.2011 made in HMCMA.No. 5 of 2010 on the file of I Additional District Judge, Madurai confirming the order dated 31.08.2010 made in HMOP.No.481 of 2009 on the file of 3rd Additional Sub Court, Madurai.
For Appellant : Mr. Sundaravathanam for Mr.B.Vijayakarthikeyan For Respondent : Mr. D. Venkatesh
JUDGMENT
The un-successful husband before the Courts below is the appellant before this Court. The appellant had filed HMOP.No. 481 of 2009, on the file of the III Additional Subordinate Court, Madurai, seeking divorce from his wife / respondent herein. From reading of the petition that has been filed for divorce, it appears that the appellant / petitioner has suspicion over the conduct of the respondent / wife. The petitioner has gone even to the extent of denying paternity of the child. The respondent / wife has filed a counter denying the allegations raised in the petition and further contending that she had lead a normal matrimonial life with her husband and not refused physical intimacy with the appellant / husband herein. It is also seen that the petitioner had challenged the paternity of the child in I.A.No.481 of 2009 and DNA test has been conducted. The DNA test went against the appellant herein and therefore, both the Courts below dismissed the application on the ground that the cause of action as pleaded by the appellant has not been proved. Challenging the said orders, the present Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal filed by the appellant / husband.
1/5
CMSA(MD).No.40 of 2011
// True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
trp
To
2.III Additional Sub Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to Mr.B.VIJAYAKARTHIKEYAN, Advocate ( SR-91991[F] dated 15/10/2019 )
+1 CC to Mr.D.VENKATESH, Advocate ( SR-92158[F] dated 16/10/2019 )
CMSA(MD).No.40 of 2011 15.10.2019
VB(15.11.2019) 2P 5C
2/5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the lower court's order dismissing a divorce petition where DNA test proved the appellant is the father.
Whether the allegation of female infidelity and denial of paternity established the cause of action for divorce.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Manoharan
Saranya
P.T. ASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
