Mary Juliet Rani vs S. Selvaraj and Another

Venkataswami, J.—These papers are placed before us for confirmation as required u/s 17 of the Indian Divorce Act. The petitioner in this

case is the wife. According to the statement made in the petition, the marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent took place on 16-6-

1982 at Christ Church, Pugalur, Karur Taluk. After the marriage, the petitioner and the first respondent lived as husband and wife only for fifteen

days at Pugalur. The first respondent has not evinced any interest in the marriage that took place on 16-6-1982, and it was made known that he

married the petitioner out of compulsion of his parents. The first respondent, on one occasion, attempted to strangulate the petitioner in the

presence of her father. After that, the first respondent deserted the petitioner on 1-7-1982 without any reasonable cause or excuse and he has

been living separately. The petitioner came to know later on that the first respondent was living with the second respondent, and through the

second respondent, the first respondent got a child. On the basis of the allegations, the petitioner claimed that the first respondent is guilty of

adultery as well as cruelty, and, therefore, she is entitled to a decree for dissolution of the marriage.

Though notices were served on the respondents, they remained ex parte.

In the Court below, the petitioner examined herself as P.W. 1, and one Arun Vijayakumar was also examined as P.W. 2. Both gave evidence to

substantiate the allegations made in the petition. In addition to the oral evidence, documents, Exts. P-1 to P-4 were marked, to support the

statements made in the petition. The Court below, on the basis of the pleadings, evidence and arguments advanced before it, held that without any

reasonable cause the first respondent has committed cruelty and also was living in adultery with the second respondent. It was also found that the

first respondent got a child through second respondent. In view of all these uncontroverted materials and evidence, the Court below granted

dissolution as prayed for u/s 10 of the Indian Divorce Act.

We have gone through the judgment of the Court below and other relevant records. We have no good reason to differ from the view taken by

the Court below. Accordingly, we confirm the decree granted by the Court below.

Order accordingly.