THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.291 of 2014
Thanigainathan S/o.Gounasegarane .. Appellant Vs Umavathy W/o.Thanigainathan .. Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed u/s.19 of the Family Court Act, 1955, against the order of Family Court, Puducherry, passed in M.O.P.No.42 of 2010 on 13.02.2013.
For Appellant : Mr.K.S.Ilangovan for M/s.Achari and Antoni For Respondent : Mr.V.Balamurugane *****
J U D G M E N T
[Judgment of the Court was made by C.T.SELVAM, J.] This appeal arises against the order of Family Court, Puducherry, passed in M.O.P.No.42 of 2010 on 13.02.2013.
2. Appellant and respondent are husband and wife. The marriage between them was solemnized on 31.01.1997. Out of the wedlock, a boy child was born to them. Differences arose between them. Appellant/husband moved M.O.P.No.42 of 2010 on the file of Family Court, Puducherry, seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. Appellant/husband examined himself and marked 5 exhibits. Respondent/wife examined herself and marked 1 exhibit. On appreciation of evidence and materials before it, Court below, under judgment dated 13.02.2013, dismissed such petition. There against, the present appeal has been filed.
3. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondent.
4. In dismissing the petition moved by appellant/husband, Court below has found that appellant/husband has alleged that respondent/wife used to quarrel with him, tore his shirt as also threw away the 'mangal sutra', but no evidence was produced to prove such allegation. Though appellant/husband has alleged that respondent/wife has suspected that he had an illegal relationship, that she enquired with his co-staff and thereby spoiled his reputation, he has not chosen to examine any of his co-staff to prove such allegation. Further, appellant/husband has not chosen to examine the elders in the family to establish that respondent/wife was in the habit of torturing him. Prior to filing of the petition, appellant/husband has issued Ex.P3, legal notice, to which respondent/wife has caused Ex.P4, reply, denying the allegations. Though respondent/wife, in her evidence, has admitted that she had suspected that appellant/husband was having illegal affair since a girl working in his office used to call him over phone continuously, Court below found that mere suspicion would not amount to cruelty. Ex.R1, letter written by appellant/husband, revealed that appellant/husband was trying to get the consent of respondent/wife for his second marriage. From the above, Court below has found that appellant/husband has moved the petition making false allegations against respondent/wife only towards fulfilling his intent of second marriage and dismissed the petition. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the order under challenge.
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal shall stand dismissed. No costs.
Index:yes/no Internet:yes mrr/gm To The Family Court, Puducherry.
[C.T.S., J] [M.V.M., J] 22.11.2017
C.T.SELVAM, J
and M.V.MURALIDARAN, J
mrr/gm
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.291 of 2014
http://www.judis.nic.in
22.11.2017