Madras High Court
V.Sankararaman vs Nandhini @ Gomathi Lakshmi on 25 September, 2024
Author: P.Velmurugan
Bench: P.Velmurugan
2024:MHC:3466
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
C.M.A(MD)Nos.736 and 737 of 2019
and
C.M.P(MD)Nos.9417 and 9418 of 2019
C.M.A(MD)No.736 of 2019
V.Sankararaman ... Appellant/Respondent
.Vs.
Nandhini @ Gomathi Lakshmi ... Respondent/Petitioner
C.M.A(MD)No.737 of 2019
V.Sankararaman ... Appellant/Petitioner
.Vs.
Nandhini @ Gomathi Lakshmi ... Respondent/Respondent
COMMON PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 19 of
the Family Courts Act to call for the records relating to the Judgments and
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
decrees made in H.M.O.P.Nos.328 and 855 of 2016, dated 20.3.2019, on the file
of Family Court, Madurai and to set aside the same.
For Appellant : Mr.V.Sasikumar
in both cases
For Respondent : Ms.L.Thenmozhi
in both cases
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN,J)
These Civil Miscellaneous are directed against the Judgments and decrees
made in H.M.O.P.Nos.328 and 855 of 2016, dated 20.03.2019, on the file of
Family Court, Madurai and to set aside the same.
2.For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as the husband
and wife in the appeals.
3.The husband has filed a petition for divorce in H.M.O.P.No.855 of 2016
for divorce before the Family Court, Madurai and pending that appeal, the wife
has filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights in H.M.O.P.No.328 of 2016
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and since both the appeals are arising out of the same spouses, both the Petitions
are taken up together by the Family Court and passed a common order.
4.The husband filed petition for dissolution of marriage held between the
appellant and respondent on 26.5.2010 under Section 13(i)(ia) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, whereas, the wife has filed petition for restitution of conjugal rights
under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and both the matters are taken up
together and this common judgment is passed.
5.The brief facts of the appeals are that:
The marriage between the appellant/husband and respondent/wife was
solemnized on 26.5.2010 and after marriage they lived together as husband and
wife from 27.5.2010 to 31.10.2010 in the husband house and wife caused mental
cruelty to the husband and she is also suffering from mental illness.Therefore he
filed petition for divorce on the ground of mental cruelty.
6.The respondent wife denied the allegations levelled against her by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
husband and pending the appeal for divorce filed by the husband, she has filed
petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
7.During enquiry, in order to substantiate the case, on the side of the
husband, he was examined as P.W.1 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P4 were marked and on the
side of the respondent/wife, the wife was examined as R.W.1 and Ex.R1 and
Ex.R2 were marked. After completion of enquiry, Petition for divorce filed by the
husband is dismissed and the Petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the
wife is allowed. Aggrieved by the same, both the appeals are filed by the
appellant/husband before this Court.
8.The learned counsel for the husband would submit that the respondent
wife was suffering from mental illness and caused mental cruelty.Therefore he
filed petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty. On a perusal of the records, the
allegations levelled by the husband is only seeking divorce on the ground of
cruelty. Though the husband was examined as P.,W.1, he reiterated the
allegllations levelled in the Petition in his proof affidavit. However, he has not
examined any independent witness to speak about the cruelty done by the wife
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and the husband has also not filed any documentary evidence relating to cruelty
or documents relating to medical treatment by the Medical Officers or any
medical prescribtion given in favour of the wife in proof of the fact that she is
suffering from mental illness. Once the husband has come forward to get divorce
on the ground of mental cruelty, there is no definition in the Act to the effect that
what is mental cruelty. However, the husband has not examined any
independent witness or produce any documents to substantiate the ground of
cruelty done by the wife to him. Even he has not examined the Psychiatrist or the
medical officers who has given treatment to the wife. He has not produced any
other document except Ex.P1 to Ex.P4 marked at the time of enquiry. Ex.P1 is the
marriage invitation , Ex.P2 is the joint photograph of husband and wife, Ex.P3 is
the Family Card and Ex.P4 is the Aadhhar Card of the appellant. Except these
four documents, no other document was marked in order to substantiate the
allegations mentioned in the petition. It is the duty of the appellant husband to
prove his case by leading oral and documentary evidence. .Except the allegations
mentioned in the Petition, he has not made any attempt to substantiate those
allegations, especially, when he pleaded cruelty on the ground of mental illness of
the wife and he has not produced any materials to substantiate the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
9.However, the wife has denied the allegations levelled by the husband
against her and she has also filed petition for restitution of conjugal rights.The
husband has not filed any documents even though the wife has filed petition for
restitution of conjugal rights.When both the Petitions are tried together and a
common order is passed, the husband has filed both the appeals against the
dismissal of the divorce petition and allowing of the petition for restitution of
conjugal rights.When the wife is not competent to lead a marital life, she is not
entitled to get the relief of restitution of conjugal rights.
10.A reading of the entire materials, the Petitions filed by the husband and
wife, counter filed by the husband and wife and evidence of P.W.1 and R.W.1 and
the documents produced by either side, this Court does not find any reason to
interfere with the order passed by the Family Court, Madurai on reappreciating
the evidence with the order passed by the Family Court, Madurai. As such, there
is no merit in both the appeals and hence both the appeals are liable to be
dismissed.
11.In the result, both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
However considering the relationship between the parties, there is no order as to
costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
(P.V.,J.) (K.K.R.K.,J.)
25.09.2024
NCS : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
vsn
To
The Judge,
Family Court,
Madurai.
Copy to
The Record Keeper,
V.R.Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
P.VELMURUGAN,J.
and
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.
vsn
COMMON JUDGMENT MADE IN
C.M.A(MD)Nos.736 and 737 of 2019
and
C.M.P(MD)Nos.9417 and 9418 of 2019
25.09.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
