Jayasree vs Rajeshkumar
2021 Latest Caselaw 3144 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

                                     &

                    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

       THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 8TH MAGHA, 1942

                         Mat.Appeal.No.759 OF 2012

  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OPHMA 101/2010 DATED 28-09-2012 OF FAMILY
                          COURT, ALAPPUZHA


APPELLANT/S:

                JAYASREE
                AGED 37 YEARS
                D/O.DETHAN, SREEVENKIDESWARA NILAYAM, PUTHIYAVILA
                VADAKKU, PATTOLI MARKET P.O., ARATTUPUZHA VILLAGE,
                KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

                BY ADVS.
                SMT.DEEPA SREENIVASAN
                SRI.M.J.MANOJ

RESPONDENT/S:

                RAJESHKUMAR
                AGED 37 YEARS
                S/O. MOHANAN, MARTHANDAM CHIRAYIL, MUTHUKULAM MURI,
                MUTHUKULAM VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA
                DISTRICT-690 506.

                R1 BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO

     THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 [ Mat.Appeal.759/2012]

                               -:2:-



                          J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 28th day of January 2021

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

The appellant is the wife and the

respondent is the husband. Their marriage was

solemnized on 29/4/2007 in accordance with the

custom prevailing in Hindu-Ezhava community.

The marriage was the second marriage for both

parties. The respondent herein filed a

petition for divorce alleging cruelty and

desertion. The Family Court allowed the

petition for divorce. Challenging the decree

of divorce, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant. The Family Court noted

differences of opinion of the parties from the

very beginning of marriage itself. The Family

Court also noted that marriage has been

irretrievably broken from the very inception of

the marriage. It is in this background, the

Family Court analysed the evidence adduced by

parties.

[ Mat.Appeal.759/2012]

2. The respondent-petitioner was examined

as PW1 before the Family Court. PW2 is his

father. Apart from the oral evidence, the

Family Court noted the following facts:

i. Filing of a criminal complaint by the

wife for the offences punishable under Section

323 and 498-A read with Section 34 of IPC.

ii. Acquittal of husband and his relatives

as per Ext.A6 judgment in Calender Case

No.642/2010.

iii. Withdrawal of wife from matrimonial

relationship by refusing physical contact.

3. On an analysis of findings and

evidence adduced, we find that the Family Court

was justified in granting divorce. It has come

out in evidence that the appellant-wife filed

unnecessary complaints against respondent-

husband and his relatives. We also need not

disbelieve the assertion made by the father of [ Mat.Appeal.759/2012]

the respondent that appellant-wife attacked

mother-in-law. The conduct and approach of

appellant, clearly establishes that the

respondent made out a case for divorce. We

therefore, refrain from interfering with the

impugned judgment. Accordingly, we dismiss

this Mat. Appeal. No order as to costs.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS JUDGE ms