JAYARAMAN Vs. VIMALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved over the decree and judgment of the learned Principal District Judge, Villupuram, in O.S.No.86 of 2007 dated 20.01.2010, decreeing the suit for a sum of Rs. 4.00 lakhs towards marriage expenses of the plaintiffs, the present appeal came to be filed by the defendant. The plaintiffs also filed Cross-Objections challenging the decree and judgment of the learned trial Court for restriction of the claim of the plaintiffs to Rs. 4.00 lakhs instead of 6.00 lakhs. The Appellant has also filed a petition under Order 41 Rule 27 of Civil Procedure Code for reception of additional documents on the side of the Appellant. For the sake of convenience, the parties are arrayed as per their own ranking before the trial Court.

(2.) Brief facts of the plaintiffs' case is as follows:- The plaintiffs are the daughters of the defendant born through their mother Dhanammal. They have got two other brothers and one elder sister born through their mother Dhanammal to the defendant herein. The defendant has been leading a very wayward life and he was cohabiting with a concubine by name Malarvizhi. Because of the activities of the defendant, the defendant's father in order to protect his properties had even executed a registered settlement deeds in favour of his grandson Sivakumar. Even after such settlement, the defendant has encroached upon the properties settled in favour of his son Sivakumar. The plaintiffs along with their mother have also filed maintenance case against the defendant for his will-full desertion of the plaintiffs and their mother, before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Villupuram. In spite of the orders of the Chief Judicial Magistrate to pay Rs. 1100/- per month as maintenance to the plaintiffs, the defendant did not comply with the order properly. The defendant had deserted the plaintiffs and their mother and residing with the concubine Malarvizhi and also begotten three children through he said Malarvizhi. The plaintiffs are living a very difficult economic condition even for day to day living and they are depending their brother Sivakumar's coolly work in the fields. The defendant is living with the said Malarvizhi in a very affluent economic condition. He is in possession of more than ten acres of land and also in possession of a rice mill in which he is earning Rs. 1000/- per day. Because of difficult and impecunious situation of the family, their mother could not give consent for performing the marriage of the first plaintiff. For the performance of the marriage the plaintiffs required to spend substantial amount for purchase of jewels, utensils, cot and almirah etc. The above expenses are absolutely necessary considering the present gold market. Apart from the above expenses, minimum Rs. 3.00 lakhs for each of the plaintiffs is required for the performance of their marriage. The defendant who is the father of the plaintiffs is liable to make payment for the marriage expenses of the plaintiffs. The defendant has spent huge amount for his illegitimate daughter born through Malarvizhi. The plaintiffs have issued a legal notice to the defendant demanding Rs. 6.00 lakhs towards their marriage expenses. The defendant has not chosen to reply the same. Hence the suit.

(3.) The defendant generally denying the allegations in the plaint, further contended that the suit itself is filed at the instigation of Sivakumar as a counter blast to the appeal preferred by this defendant in A.S.No.13 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Sub-Judge, Villupuram as against the decree and judgment in O.S.No.150 of 1998 to which the said Sivakumar and his mother Dhanammal are parties. The present suit is filed at the behest of the said Sivakumar. The defendant has incurred debts to the tune of Rs. 4.00 lakhs towards the construction of the rice mill and a sum of Rs. 3.00 lakhs towards the construction of the house and Rs. 2.00 lakhs towards the marriage expenses of his daughters Sivakumi and Jayanthi. Hence, he is not liable to provide the marriage expenses of the plaintiffs. However, as a dutiful father he would arrange for the marriage of his daughters provided they are willing and consenting to marry the persons chosen by him and withdraw the vexatious maintenance proceedings and the suit. It is the contention of the defendant that Malarvizhi is not a concubine and she was also married by the defendant with the consent of the plaintiffs' mother. The defendant has celebrated the puberty ceremonies of Sivakami and Jayanthi jointly on 12.05.1995 and celebrated the marriage of Sivakami on 26.10.2001. The marriage of Jayanthi was also celebrated by the defendant on 03.02.2006. The defendant has also alienated some of the suit properties in order to meet out the marriage expenses of the plaintiffs' sisters Sivakami and Jayanthi. The defendant has been discharging his duties as a dutiful father by doing justice to the children born to Dhanammal and Malarvizhi. There is no legal obligation for him to perform the marriage of the plaintiffs. But as stated above, as a dutiful father he is always willing to perform their marriage provided they are willing and prepared to accept the proposals brought out by the defendant.