CMA/480/2023 of S.SINDHU Vs B.SAIRAM on 23 September 2026

Judgment

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.T.Asha J.) The respondent-wife has challenged the decree for divorce granted by the Principal Family Court, Chennai in O.P.No.4762 of 2014 declaring the marriage between the appellant and the respondent herein as null and void.

2. The short facts which are necessary for disposing of the above civil miscellaneous appeal are herein below set out.

(i) The respondent herein had filed O.P.No.4762 of 2014 under Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to declare the marriage solemnized between him and the appellant on 31.08.2014 as null and void. It is his contention that the marriage had taken place as per Hindu rites and customs. Out of this wedlock, there are no issues, since the appellant herein is incapable of having a physical relationship. The respondent would submit that within a week from the date of marriage, he found the behaviour of the appellant to be very abnormal. He found that the appellant could not sleep for days and nights together and during the day, she would talk to herself and laugh without any reason. She was also in the habit of talking irrelevantly. The respondent would further submit that the appellant could not hold a conversation with the respondent and she did not even understand the relationship of a husband and wife and the marital obligations associated with it. The respondent therefore understood that the appellant’s behaviour was not normal and immediately informed her parents. However, her parents were not surprised by the same, as it appears that the condition of the appellant was well known to them.

(ii) The respondent would submit that thereafter he made an enquiry and he came to learn that his wife suffered from schizophrenia for which she had been taking treatment at the Mental Hospital, Kilpauk, Chennai prior to the marriage. However, all these facts had been suppressed and the appellant was given in marriage to the respondent. The respondent would submit that he had been deliberately deceived by the parents of the appellant. He thereafter took the appellant to the Kilpauk Mental Hospital and admitted her from 10.10.2014 to 12.11.2014 for treatment. She was given treatment and the doctors, after thoroughly examining the appellant, had given the medical report. Thereafter, the appellant was taken from the hospital by her parents to their home. On 05.11.2014, one Dr.Jayanthini had given counselling three times to the appellant and the respondent. Despite all these medical attentions, the appellant’s behaviour had not undergone any change. Considering the fact that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent had been conducted by suppressing the material facts, he had come forward to file the above O.P.

3. The appellant herein had filed a counter denying the allegations contained in the petition. She would deny the allegation that there was no physical relationship between the two. It was her contention that since she had come to a new place and was not used to the commands and ill-treatment meted out to her by her mother-in-law, she felt unhappy. She was taken for counselling by the respondent and his family to give her mental support and that is now being misused by the respondent. At no point in time, had she suffered from any mental illness. She would submit that she is normal and fit for matrimonial life. She would submit that she has been deserted by the respondent without any reason and her jewellery and personal belongings are with the respondent. Therefore, she would therefore seek to have the appeal dismissed.

4. The respondent had examined himself as P.W1 and marked Exs.P1 to P4. Though sufficient opportunities were given to the appellant for cross examination, she had failed to do so and evidence of P.W1 was closed. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai, on perusing the evidence on record particularly Ex.P4-Medical Report held that the appellant suffers from mental illness and allowed the petition. Challenging the same the appellant is before this Court.

5. Heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. The respondent has come forward to file the divorce petition on the ground that the appellant had suffered from mental illness. Though the appellant herein has filed a counter denying the allegations, she has not chosen to cross-examine the respondent to rebut his evidence. She has also not examined herself as a witness or subjected herself to cross-examination. Therefore, there is no proof to support her case. The respondent, on the other hand, has filed Ex.P4 which is the medical record of the appellant. A perusal of the same would support the contention of the respondent. There has been no objection to the marking of the document. Mr.Balakrishnan, who has given the psychological evaluation report, has ultimately found that her intellectual efficiency is below average andher recall is poor, that she gets significant scores on paranoid and schizophrenic scales with depressive element, that she finds it difficult to communicate with others as she is not on the same wavelength as others, and that there are problems in adjustment in the area of family unit, marriage, sex and self-concept and that she is anxious and worried about her marital life.

7. In the light of the above medical report and the fact that the appellant has not taken any steps whatsoever to prove her case, we find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court Chennai. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. (P.T.A.,J.) (N.M.,J.) 23-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SRN To The Principal Judge, Principal Family Court Chennai

P.T.ASHA J. AND N.MALA J. SRN CMA No. 480 of 2023 23-09-2026