CHENNAI: Misunderstandings are part and parcel of a marital life and if there is no difference of opinion between the husband and wife, then it is certainly a news, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court has observed.
The Bench of Justice R Sudhakar (since transferred to Jammu & Kashmir High Court) and Justice S Vaidyanathan made the observation while setting aside the orders of the Family Court in Chennai granting a decree of divorce to Jithendra Bhandari and rejecting the plea of Sangeetha, the wife, for restitution of her conjugal rights last week.
The marriage between Sangeetha and Jithendra Bandari, belonging to the orthodox Jain community, was solemnised on June 28,1998 in Chennai and they had two children. The husband initially filed a petition seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and the Family Court granted the decree in his favour on November 25, 2011. Thereafter, the wife filed a petition praying for restitution of conjugal rights, which was also dismissed by the Family Court. Hence, the present appeals from Sangeetha in the High Court. Allowing the appeals, the Bench pointed out that though the husband had stated that his refusal to lend money to the parents of his wife frustrated her to the point of committing suicide on November 6, 2005, the same ought not to have been treated as a cruelty and accepted by the Family Court. From the pleadings, it is seen that after the alleged incident of suicide, the husband had taken care of the wife, whose spinal cord was broken in the fall, nearly for two years and thereafter, on account of his leaving for Rajasthan, since there was no one to look after her, the wife had moved to her mother’s house, which cannot be termed as desertion.
The conclusion of the court below on the basis of the available evidence is erroneous. The petition for restitution of conjugal rights after four years from the date of filing of the divorce petition is no ground to hold it against her for desertion,” the High court Bench said.