IN BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT AT CHENNAI
H.M.O.P.No. of 2007
1. Dhanraj 1st
petitioner
And
2. Ponmalar 2nd petitioner.
PETITION UNDER SECTION 13B OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,
1955
The petitioners above-named beg to
state as follows:
1.The first petitioner is Dhanraj son of
Mr.R.Ramachandran, Hindu, aged about 29 years, residing at No.144, Arcot
Road, Vadapalani, Chennai-600026.
2. The second petitioner is Ponmalar
daughter of Mr.M.S.Viswanathan, Hindu, , aged about 27 years, residing at No.27
M.M.D.A. Colony, Arumbakkam, Chennai-600104
The addresses for service of all
notices and process to the petitioners are as stated above.
3. The first petitioner and the
second petitioner are husband and wife
respectively having been married at Maha Subhalakshmi Kalyana Mandapam, No.75,
Razack Garden Main Road, M.M.D.A Colony, Arumbakkam, Chennai -106 on 30-10-2005
and the said marriage is still subsisting. The marriage was performed in
accordance with Hindu Vedic Rites. A copy of the marriage invitation is filed
herewith. Subsequently the petitioners registered their marriage at the
Sub-Register office at Perambur and the Marriage Certificate No is 234/2005.
Out of their wedlock no children were born to them.
4. The petitioners submit that the second
petitioner was married to the first petitioner arranged by her parents against
her wishes and will. The first petitioner and the second petitioner after the
marriage lived and resided at No.144, Arcot Road, Vadapalani, Chennai-600026,
whence they separated on 7/12/2005. Soon after the unwilling marriage of the
second petitioner owing to differences
in temperament, habits, tastes, thoughts, and increasing incompatibility, the
relationship between the first petitioner and the second petitioner deteriorated.
The second petitioner left the matrimonial home on 7/12/2005 and thereafter she is
residing with her parents. The compromise measures taken by the parents of the
petitioners ended in vain. The marriage between the petitioners is not consummated
and no conjugal rights were performed by both the petitioners from the date of
marriage. Never to return to each other. The petitioners, therefore, separated
owing to irreconcilable differences in habits and temperament on the above
mentioned date.
5. The petitioners submit that the
first petitioner who is working as an system Anayalst in HCL in Chennai. The
above said company has offered the first petitioner to work in M/s.Donald
Associates in Canada on deputation. The
measures taken by their parents and friends also ended in vain. So the efforts and attempts were made by mutual
friends and acquaintances to effect a reconciliation and for a resumption of
the martial relationship but it has not been possible owing to the vital
differences in temperament and total incompatibility giving rise to invincible
repugnance which had rendered normal married life impractible and impossible
and fraught with dangerous adverse physical and mental consequences.
6. The petitioner submit that after
having a deep discussions and deliberations and found they are not compatiable
to each other and cannot continue the marriage any more. The petitioners have
been living separately for a period of more than one year. The first petitioner
is working as a system anyalst for M/s.HCL. and the second petitioner is a
Chartered accountant for some companies. and both are earning well and they do
not have any liability to mainatain each other and they have no claim or
obligation to be performed by any one to the other petitioner. And both of them
is resding separately form the date of separation. And the misunderstanding
between them and unwillingness to lead a matrimonial home are difficult for the
petitioners to rejoin. The second petitioner has never depend on the financial and moral support from the first petitioner, since from her marriage. The
petitioners further submit that there was no issues born to them by the reason
of their non cohabitation .The petitioners further submit that there was no
chance of living together and they want to release from the martial relations
for the better living of them.
7. The petitioners states that the first petitioner and the second petitioner have been separated
and living apart for more than one year
and there was no cohabitation before and after their separation.
8. In the circumstances the first
petitioner and the second petitioner have mutually agreed and decided that
there is no point for the continuance of the martial relationship and have
further agreed upon the dissolution of the marriage tie by a decree of divorce.
9. The petitioners state and submit
that in the circumstances aforesaid it is therefore desirable and necessary
that the marriage should be dissolved in the mutual interests of the parties,
there being no chance of reconciliation.
11. The petitioners therefore file
this petition jointly seeking an order of dissolution of marriage that took
place between them on30/10/2005 at Maha
Subhalakshmi Kalyana Mandapam, No.75, Razack Garden Main Road, M.M.D.A Colony,
Arumbakkam, Chennai -106.
12. The petitioner is not filed in
collusion or after unnecessary or improper delay in approaching this court. The
petitioners or either of them has not approached any other court seeking any
matrimonial reliefs.
13.The petitioners submit that
there was no force, fraud, coercion, intimidation or undue influence in filing
this petition.
14. The petitioners submit that
this petition has been filed after one year from the date of marriage and there
is no possibility of reunion.
15.The cause of action for this petition
arose on the 30/10/2005 ,
when the first and the second petitioner were married and separated on 7/12/2005 at Chennai is
,within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble
Court
.
17. Both the first and the second
petitioner state that there is no impediment to the dissolution of the marriage
and the decision to separate and apply for a divorce has been arrived at after
such consideration and after having given the utmost importance to all aspects
of the case.
18.The first and the second
petitioner therefore pray that this Hon'ble
Court
[a]pass a decree declaring the
marriage solemnized between the first and the second petitioner under the Hindu
Vedic rites on 30/10/2005 be dissolved
and
[b] Pass such other order/orders as
this Hon'ble Court
Dated at Chennai on day
of January, 2007
First
Petitioner.
Second
Petitioner.
VERIFICATION
I,Dhanraj
and Ponmalar, the petitioners herein do hereby state that what is stated above
in paragraphs 1 to 16 are true to the best of her knowledge, information and
belief.
Verified at Chennai on this the th
day of January 2007.
Petitioner.
DOCUMENTS
FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 14(1) CPC
1.
Election card of first petitioner
2.
Marriage invitation
3. Election
card of second petitioner
4.
Marriage photo.
Dated at Chennai this the th
day of January 2007
Petitioner.
DOCUMENTS
FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 14(2) CPC
Nil for the present
Dated at Chennai this
the th
day of January 2007
Petitioner.
STATEMENT
OF ADDRESS OF THE PARTIES FOR SERVICES OF NOTICE UNDER ORDER VI RULE 14A CPC
Name & Address of Petitioner: Dhanraj
No.144, Arcot Road,
Vadapalani,
Chennai-600026
Ponmalar
No.27
M.M.D.A. Colony,
Arumbakkam,
Chennai-600104
VERIFICATION
I, Dhanraj
and Ponmalar, the petitioners herein do hereby state that what is stated above
in Address is true to the best of her knowledge, information and belief.
Verified at Chennai this the th
day of January 2007.
Petitioner.
Awesome post, exceptionally educational. I ask why alternate masters of this area don't see this. You should proceed with your written work. I'm sure, you have an extraordinary perusers' base as of now! internet in toa alta
ReplyDeleteThis can be used when a spouse's whereabouts are unknown or is unwilling to participate in the divorce process. David Karp
ReplyDelete