Asha K R vs Shiju P T
2021 Latest Caselaw 15842 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
       THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
                               &
        THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
   FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1943
                  MAT.APPEAL NO. 22 OF 2016
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 198/2014 OF FAMILY COURT,
                       PALA, KOTTAYAM
APPELLANT/S:

          ASHA K R,
          AGED 31 YEARS, W/O.SHIJU P.T., KATTIPLAKKAL
          HOUSE,VALLICHIRA VILLAGE, VALLICHIRA P.O,
          KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS.
          SRI.P.BABU KUMAR
          SRI.P.YADHU KUMAR


RESPONDENT/S:
          SHIJU P T,
          AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.THANKAPPAN, POOVETTIPARAYIL
          HOUSE,THODUPUZHA VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

          THANKAPPAN, S/O RAJAPPAN, AGED 60,
          POOVETTIPARAYIL HOUSE, KARINKUNNAM P.O.,
          THODUPUZHA VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

          RADHA THANKAPPAN, W/O THANKAPPAN, POOVETTIPARAYIL
          HOUSE, KARINKUNNAM P.O., THODUPUZHA VILLAGE,
          IDUKKI DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS.
          SMT.R.ANJANA
          SMT.R.PRIYA
          SRI.M.B.SANDEEP
          SRI.B.SURJITH

   THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
30.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                        -: 2 :-

Mat.Appeal No. 22 of 2016




                    Mat.Appeal No. 22 of 2016
                .....................................................


               Dated this the 30th day of July 2021


                                JUDGMENT

Muhamed Mustaque, J

This appeal is filed by the wife challenging the decree of divorce granted in favour of respondent/ husband under Section 13 (1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

2. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 21-1-2009, in accordance with Hindu religious rites and ceremonies. Respondent/husband filed a petition for divorce alleging cruelty before the Family Court, Thodupuzha, and thereafter, it was transferred to the Family Court, Pala. Respondent alleged that he was

Mat.Appeal No. 22 of 2016

verbally abused and harassed in front of his parents and others. The respondent also narrated about personality disorder of the appellant. Appellant denied all allegations. According to the appellant, respondent treated her only for his sexual pleasure and satisfaction. Appellant also raised counter allegations of cruelty on the side of respondent/ husband.

3. Family Court after adverting to the treatment of the appellant in Pushpagiri Medical College Hospital noted that appellant suffers from anger and had tendency for committing suicide. Family Court, placing reliance on medical evidence concluded that respondent/ husband would find it difficult to live peacefully with the appellant.

4. Appellant also has filed a separate petition for recovery of gold ornaments. That was partly allowed. The above case was also tried along with this case. However, we find no appeal is seen filed against the aforesaid decree.

Mat.Appeal No. 22 of 2016

5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent. The parties are admittedly living separately for more than a decade now. From the initial phase of the marriage life itself, there were bickerings and disputes between the parties. The allegations and counter allegations were raised regarding cruelty. The family court mainly relied on medical evidence and the testimony of the doctor who treated the appellant. In the medical records maintained at the Carmel Medical Centre, Pala, the doctor who treated the appellant had recorded the statements of the appellant and respondent. It was noted that appellant used to hit her head on the wall and once she had cut her wrist. It seems that the appellant was also taken to counseling. Dr. Roy Abraham was examined as DW5. In his chief examination, he deposed about the problems narrated to him by the appellant. The medical evidence highlight the anger problem of the appellant. It is not known whether it is attributable to any ailment being suffered by the appellant or not. Family Court detected that behaviour of

Mat.Appeal No. 22 of 2016

such person would not allow other spouse to continue in the matrimony peacefully. There are many problem associated with anger. It would impact the relationship in matrimony. Considering the medical evidence, we cannot disbelieve the oral evidence given by the respondent/husband as to the mental abuse meted out by him. The husband in his pleadings as well as in his testimony have narrated the instance of abuse and harassment . This court need not find any reason to decline the assertion of the husband in the light of the medical evidence produced. We therefore, affirm the finding of the family court and dismiss this appeal. No order as to costs.

Sd/-A. Muhamed Mustaque, Judge.

Sd/-Dr. Kauser Edappagath

/true copy/ ani/

Mat.Appeal No. 22 of 2016

Appendix

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

ANNEXURE A1:

CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P NO.198/14 PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT, PALA DATED 6.11.2015.