LEELAMMA, N.P. Vs. MONI, M.A.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent wife in on the file of the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumannor is the appellant in Mat.A.No. 681 of 2007. The petitioner/wife in OP.No.455 of 2004 on the file of the same court is the appellant in Mat.A.No.682 of 2007 and respondent/husband in the same case is the appellant in Mat.A.No. 653 of 2007.

(2.) on the file of the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumannor was filed by the husband for dissolution of marriage under Sec. 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called the Act) on the ground of cruelty and desertion. It is alleged in the petition that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 8.11.1977 as per Hindu custom and they lived together as man and wife till 12.4.1982. Two children were born to them in that wedlock, one of whom was a boy and the other is a girl. While the respondent was residing with the petitioner, she was not obeying him and not loyal to him. She had removed 15 sovereigns of gold ornaments from his custody without his knowledge and consent. She was always in the habit of picking up quarrel with him for even silly matters. On 12.4.1982, without any reasonable cause, she withdrew from the company of the husband along with the children who are aged 3 1/2 years and two years respectively. Though he made all attempts for a reunion, she was not amenable for the same. She started residing in her parental house. She had denied all his marital rights. While so, petitioner sent a notice to the respondent asking her to resume cohabitation for which she sent a reply expressing her unwillingness to join him. So petitioner filed OP(HMA)No.53/82 before the Sub Court, Kottayam for restitution of conjugal rights u/s 9 of the Act. Though an attempt was made of settling the issues between them, and to restart their life together with the children, that failed due the adamant attitude of the respondent. Respondent contested the case and after evidence, the Sub Court, Kottayam granted a decree for restitution of conjugal rights holding that the respondent was residing separately without any reasonable cause. The respondent filed appeal before this court as and by judgment dated 16.3.1987, this court has set aside the decree passed by the Sub Court and dismissed the petition. The petitioner was a graduate working in the Dairy Department of Government of Kerala as a senior Gazetted Officer. The respondent was working as Secretary in Govt. Employees Co-operative Bank, Kottayam and getting good income. He was also backed by a good fortune as inherited by his father. After dismissal of the petition for restitution of conjugal rights, though he made attempts to have a reunion considering the welfare of the children through mediators including the office bearers of the SNDP sakha of the area, but it failed. The attitude of the respondent wife amounts to cruelty and desertion and so he had no other option except to file the petition for divorce on the above grounds as there was no possibility of reunion and the marriage tie between them had been irrecoverably broken down. Hence the petition.

(3.) He amended the petition as per order in IA 1498/2005 wherein he had alleged that the respondent used to behave very cruelly both physically and mentally towards the petitioner from 12.04.82 onwards. She was living separately from the petitioner. She was making baseless and false accusation against the petitioner with malicious intention to defame him before the public and relatives. She was accusing him as a womanizer and a drunkard. She without any basis accusing him that he was having illegal relationship even with his close relatives and several women. Making such false and baseless accusation caused great anguish and mental torture to the petitioner. She was sending false and frivolous complaints to the higher authorities. Even after lapse of 21 years from the date of separation, she filed false complaints against him before the DYSP kottayam and a case was registered under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and the same was charge sheeted and he was arrested on 11.11.2003 and later he was released on bail on 12.11.2003. She made complaints to his higher authorities so as to see that his employment is lost to him. On 11.10.04 at about 4 P.m at the instance of the respondent, nine persons armed with weapons attacked him from the courtyard of his house with an intention to kill him and he escaped from them. On several occasions, respondent through her henchmen attempted to attack his sisters, Ammini and Janaki. A vigilance enquiry was initiated at the instance of the respondent and memo has been issued to him on 23.12.2003. She tried to prevent his family pension being disbursed. Petitioner filed WP(C).No.33813/2004 before this court and obtained police protection. So the act of the respondent amounts to cruelty.