Madras High Court sets aside divorce order

CHENNAI: A mother of two children, who is now moving around in a wheel-chair after she fell down from the second floor balcony, and against whom divorce was granted by a family court for causing mental cruelty to her husband, got a reprieve with the Madras high court setting aside the lower court order dissolving her marriage.

“This court is of the view there is no element of cruelty established against the wife and the marriage cannot be said to be irretrievable broken, as the wife is very much willing to live with the husband”, said a Division Bench comprising Justices R. Sudhakar (since transferred) and S. Vaidyanathan while setting aside the decree for dissolution of marriage and dismissal of the plea for restitution of conjugal rights passed by the family court here.  Disbelieving the claim of the husband that his wife consistently threatened to commit suicide and on November 6, 2005, she attempted to die by jumping from the balcony, the Bench relied on the evidence of their elder son, who was witness to the incident, that his mother fell down from the balcony in an attempt to catch hold of the bangle that slipped from her hand.

Son’s evidence saves woman’s marriage:

The Madras high court Bench relied on the evidence of their elder son, who was witness to the incident, that his mother fell down from the balcony in an attempt to catch hold of the bangle that slipped from her hand.  This corroborated her version to police who visited her in hospital. The couple got married in 1998 and has two sons. In 2008, the husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage on grounds of mental cruelty. In 2011, the wife filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. The family court here in November 2011 allowed his petition and dismissed her petition.

Aggrieved, she filed the present appeals. Her counsel K.Santhakumari contended that the family court ought to have seen that the husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage to get rid of the physically affected wife, and to get remarried.  Writing the judgment, Justice Vaidyanathan said, “Misunderstandings are part and parcel of marital life. If there is no difference of opinion between the husband and wife, then it is certainly a news”. Though, in the case on hand, the husband has stated his refusal to lend money to her parents frustrated her to commit suicide on November 6, 2015, the same ought not to have been accepted by the lower court as there was no proof to establish that money was lent in huge proportion.