Madras High Court
N.Elakkiya vs G.Elancozhan … on 15 June, 2022
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS
DATED : 15.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
N.Elakkiya ...Petitioner/Appellant/Appellant
Vs.
G.Elancozhan …Respondent/Respondent/Respondent
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed under Section 13
(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 read with Section 100 of the
Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree dated
23.10.2019 in H.M.O.P.No.31 of 2018 on the file of the learned
Subordinate Judge, Thiruvarur, confirmed by the learned Principal
District Judge, Thiruvarur, in C.M.A.No.13 of 2019.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Subramanian
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
JUDGMENT
The appellant herein is the petitioner before the learned
Subordinate Judge, Thiruvarur, in H.M.O.P.No.31 of 2018. This
petition was filed by the appellant herein for the dissolution of the
marriage solemnised between the petitioner and the respondent herein
on 01.02.2017. The appellant herein would contend in her Original
Petition that she had married the respondent who was none other than
her paternal aunt's son. The two of them had fallen in love and
thereafter, got married, on 01.02.2017 as per the Hindu rites and
customs.
2.It is the case of the appellant that she was given the customary
jewellery, household articles etc., The marriage expenses and the
articles amounted to a sum of Rs.15 lakhs which was borne entirely by
the appellant's father. After the marriage, the appellant and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
respondent started their marital life at the respondent's house. The
appellant has contended that after the marriage, the attitude of the
respondent changed and he started treating the petitioner with cruelty.
The cruelty was not only in the form of physical abuse but also by
means of obscene words in the course of the conversation. The
appellant would submit that unable to bear these atrocities, she had
within 26 days of her marriage taken refuge in her grandmother's
house. The petitioner had lodged a complaint before the All Women
Police Station at Vedaraniyam. The police held an enquiry between the
parties and advised the two of them to live together in the
grandmother's house. In the course of time, the appellant became
pregnant and instead of being happy about the same, the respondent has
started harassing and treating her further. By reason of this cruelty
meted out by her, the appellant has suffered a miscarriage. On
08.07.2017, the appellant had sent a notice to the respondent called
upon the respondent to hand over all her belongings and informing that
he should not touch with her. The petitioner therefore sought for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.
3.The respondent on entering appearance had filed his counter
denying all the allegations put forward by the appellant. The
respondent would contend that the petitioner has not come forward
with true facts. The appellant has deliberately suppressed the fact that
the respondent's family had given jeweleries to her. The respondent
would submit that the appellant had gone to her grandmother's house
only on account of the fact that the same was nearer to her College. He
would contend that the respondent had twisted the facts out of context.
The respondent would submit that he has taken several steps to
reconcile with the appellant and it is only the appellant who was
adamant in not rejoining the respondent. The allegation of cruelty was
stoutly refuted by the respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
4.The learned Subordinate Judge, Thiruvarur, after hearing the
parties and going through the evidence dismissed the petition filed by
the appellant on the ground that the allegation of cruelty has not been
proved by the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant
had filed C.M.A.No.13 of 2019 on the file of the learned Principal
District Judge, Thiruvarur. The learned Principal District Judge,
Thiruvarur, confirmed the Judgment and Decree of the learned
Subordinate Judge, Thiruvarur, holding that the petitioner who had
come out with a specific allegation of cruelty has not proved a single
one. The learned Judge had also taken into account the fact that the
Police authorities before whom a complaint had been lodged by the
petitioner had advised the parties to rejoin and try to work out their
defences. Challenging the concurrent Judgment and Decree, the
appellant is before this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
5.Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the
papers.
The appellant has filed a petition for divorce on the ground that
she had been subjected to cruelty and therefore, the marriage between
the petitioner and the respondent should be dissolved. A perusal of the
Judgment of the appellant Court, particularly, Para 14 would indicate
the grounds of cruelty pleaded by the appellant. The learned Principal
District Judge, Thiruvarur, has considered each and everyone of these
allegations and come to the conclusion that none of them have been
proved. Though the appellant had contended that she had filed a
complaint against the respondent stating that he was abusing and
harassing the petitioner, the petitioner except for marking the complaint
receipt as Ex.P.5 has not chosen to file a complaint. The contents of
the complaint are not known to this. If really, the complaint had been
filed making allegations, the respondent police would have definitely
investigated the complaint. No such thing has been taken place which
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
has raised a doubt as to whether the petitioner has come forward with
the false case. The Courts below have concurrently held against the
appellants stating that she has not proved the allegations with cogent
evidence. This Court sitting in appeal cannot reconsider the same.
Consequently, no question of law is made out and therefore, this Civil
Miscellaneous Second Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
15.06.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking order / Non speaking order
mps
To
1.The Subordinate Judge,
Thiruvarur.
2.The Principal District Judge,
Thiruvarur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
P.T. ASHA, J,
mps
C.M.S.A.No.42 of 2022
15.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
