Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8.The Respondent/Petitioner (Party-in-person) submits that he filed Petition HMOP No.32 of 2002 (under Section 13(1)(ia) and (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995  on the file of the Learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee) for divorce on the ground of cruelty and insanity against his wife, during March 2002 and ultimately, the petition has been dismissed on 02.09.2005. Subsequently, he preferred an Appeal before this Court and he was asked to file the same before the District Court, Chengalpattu and the said case was transferred to the Fast Track Court, Poonamallee and that the Appellate Court allowed his petition and granted the relief of divorce on 26.10.2006. However, in Second Appeal filed by his wife, this Court, on 22.12.2008, reversed the Decree of the divorce granted by the First Appellate Court. Furthermore, he was informed by the Registrar that his entire case file was missing and when his Advocate approached the Registrar about the non-listing of his case for a long time and finally, the orders were reserved in the middle of September 2008 and subsequently, the orders were pronounced. He submitted a representation to know about the present status of his case.

18.Finally, the Tamil Nadu Information Commission, Chennai, in Case No.40997/Enquiry/A/2011, dated 27.06.2012, has directed the Public Information Officer, Office of the Registrar, High Court, Chennai, to furnish copies of all Diary notings and hearing records of CMSA No.10/2007 to the Petitioner/Appellant (Respondent in Writ Petition) free of cost, by 11.07.2012 and report compliance to the Commission.

19.It is not in dispute that the Respondent (husband in the Writ Petition) has filed petition namely, HMOP No.32 of 2002 on the file of the Learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee, seeking the relief of dissolution of marriage, dated 27.03.1986, that took place between him and his wife under Section 13(1)(ia) and (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Respondent/Wife (Appellant in CMSA No.10 of 2007 before this Court) has filed a counter to HMOP No.32 of 2002 and orders have been passed by the trial Court, on 02.09.2005, holding that the Respondent/Husband (Petitioner in HMOP Proceedings) is not entitled to get the relief of dissolution of his marriage, dated 27.03.1986, that has taken place between him and his wife (Respondent in HMOP No.32 of 2002 and Appellant in CMSA No.10 of 2007). Further, the trial Court has proceeded to observe that there is no proper prima facie reason on the part of the Respondent/Husband (in Writ Petition) to say that his wife is not fit to lead a matrimonial life and ultimately, dismissed the Matrimonial Original Petition.

20.Being dissatisfied with the said order, dated 02.09.2005, in HMOP No.32 of 2002, passed by the Learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee, the Respondent (in Writ Petition  husband) as an Appellant, filed CMA No.70 of 2005 on the file of the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.IV), Poonamalee, as an aggrieved person.

21.The First Appellate Authority, in CMA No.70 of 2005, on 26.10.2006, has allowed the Appeal inter alia observing that 'the mental stress is proved by the Appellant. It is more than the regular wear and tear of human life. The behaviour and attitude of the respondent is born out of the psychological problem for which she has been given treatment frequently. The Appellant cannot be made to put up with the torture endlessly. Also, the Respondent/Husband has been directed to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent/wife, from the date of Appeal (CMA No.70 of 2005) dated 07.12.2005, in consideration of her health and consequently, granted the Decree for divorce in his favour', by setting aside the order dated 02.09.2005, passed by the trial Court in HMOP No.32 of 2002.

22.The Respondent's wife (in HMOP No.32 of 2002) as an aggrieved person and on being dissatisfied with the Judgment dated 26.10.2006 in CMA No.70 of 2005 on the file of the Learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.IV, Poonamallee, in reversing the Judgment in HMOP No.32 of 2002 on the file of the Learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee, dated 02.09.2005, has preferred the Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal No.10 of 2007 and also, figured as Respondent in Cross Objection No.48 of 2007 and the Respondent/Husband (Petitioner in HMOP has filed Cross Objection No.48 of 2007) as Cross Objector before this Court.