{"id":179284,"date":"2010-12-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010"},"modified":"2016-07-24T10:39:53","modified_gmt":"2016-07-24T05:09:53","slug":"col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P … vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K … on 24 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P … vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K … on 24 December, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: K.L.Manjunath & S.N.Satyanarayana<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 24TH DAY or DECEMBER 2om.V_j\n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE HoN*Bx,E MR. JUSTICE K,L,VMANJUN'A'fH  ~\n\nAND\n\nTHE HONBLE MR. JUSTIC:-:'_ S.,n.sATYkaNMIg\ufb01r;INA :2\n\nMISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAICTNO.1212'C.'II4C2'O()05s (MC)\nC\/w MISCELLANEOUS FIRST AP?EALNO;=1213 oi-12005 (MC)\n\nBETWEEN :\n\nCo1.K.Murugaiah (Reta; \n\nAged 61 Years,\n\nS\/0 P.Kanthapp3; Pii1_aiJ A A\n\nC\/C Ravi, -.\n\nM.S.A11ied 1ndus,tri'e;s', \"*1 ::~.. ..\n\n11\"' Cross, Maga.diA'Rr'>a\u00a71,V\n\nBANGALORE_-- 560 023';\n\nT    \nAged about 55'eaI'\"S \n\n =  _w\/o c'(>1.'K;MI:ru.'g;a:ah (Retd),\n H 19', Main\"-Road, 'D0:I1l1Ir,\n 560 071.\n\n{By S1~i.T.RajaI{gn1; *Ad\u00a7;.) \n\n-  AA\"{'BAy\"SInt.Shobha I-Bhavikaiiti, Adv.)\n\n*'_*_*M*M=\u00a5'-$1ll=$$_M*\n\n.. APPELLANT.\n\nCOMMON IN\nBOTH CASES\n\n.. RESPONDENT.<\/pre>\n
COMMON {N
\nBOTH CASES<\/p>\n
I\/av\u00bb:\n<\/p>\n
ix’)<\/p>\n
M.F.A.No.’1212\/2005 is filed under Section 19(1) of the
\nFamily Court Act, 1984, against. the Juclgmerit and Decree.–d_21te(,l
\n17.11.2004 passed in MC No.1055\/2000 on the \ufb011e.oVf”-.t,he_ I
\nAdditionai Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangaiore, a1]_o4wing””etiit2V.<\/p>\n
Petitiori \ufb01led by the respondent herein under Section  ~<\/p>\n
Hindu Marriage Act, for restitution of Conjugal  V  ”<\/p>\n
M.t\u00ab’.A.No.121_3\/2005 is fiied underSection.:’.1l9{1)’ei’ofHt.,he’<\/p>\n
Family Court Act, 1984, against the Juclg.\u00a7ne~11_t ar1d_-1)e:::.ree 00 daterid
\n17.11.2004 passed in MC No.11\u20ac?36;42000″v.on the’V_iiiev…ofH the <\/p>\n
Additional Principal Jtzdge, Farniiy Conrt, Baiigalore, disrnissing
\nthe Petition filed by the appeiiant herein ttnder Section 13(i]{ia)
\nand tibl of the Hindu Marriage :\u00a7ee};.i\ufb01g._g.decree of divorce.<\/p>\n
These Appeals having beiennhearri  for Judgment
\nthis day, s.N.sATYANA1\u00a7AY\u00a3t_NA Jf.,.’prot’1ot_tne_e\u00a2t’ the following:<\/p>\n
_……………..,……………._…_~_._..<\/p>\n
 ieeeeeee <\/p>\n
Theseiztwo  by-the husband challenging the
\ncommon Jtidgrnent dated 17.11.2004 in
\n:t(i,c.No.iQ55,!2ooo it:i.c.1\\to.116e\/2000 on the \ufb01le of
\n  Bangalore. M.c.No.1o5s\/2000<\/p>\n
 seelting restitution of conjugal rights is allowed<\/p>\n
 and M.C’;-No…_1’1i3,G’\/2000 filed by husband under Section 13(1]{ia)<\/p>\n
 the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking decree of divorce is<\/p>\n
r_,.{\/.-if ,1<\/p>\n
2. The essential facts leading to these two appeals are as<\/p>\n
under; The appellant in both appeals is husband, the re,\u00a33po’n_t_le.rit<\/p>\n
is his wife. Both are Ir\ufb01ricliis belonging to same t:oIr1rr_i–u_i’iity’;.lj” .<\/p>\n
marriage was arranged by elders and celebrated cin”24;’_.\u00a71:’E.97’\u00e9}~ at <\/p>\n
Palayamkottai in Tamil Nadu in the pres’erice”oI”:’the. elt1le’rs”‘df.._bo:h8<\/p>\n
family. At the time of marriage appellant was  <\/p>\n
Army. Immediately after the marriage, .respo’11clent jdiried her
\nhusband in the matrimonial  lR_e.s’p0IidentAlwas not co~
\noperating with Appellant and   him and were
\nquarrelling on   arose in 1976.\n<\/p>\n
Respondent left the   December 1976, started
\nresiding with   to inatrimonial house
\nonly in the  was in Delhi. In the year
\n1984 when  was  in Dehradun, respoaadent joined
\n  eeimpletedll lthell same during April, 1985. After<\/p>\n
eornpletiolnn in the month of May, 1985, both went to<\/p>\n
l”~~–‘responde’nt’s pareiits house in Trivendrurn for holidays. After<\/p>\n
~ .l’_jjh.olidays respoirident refused to join him in the matrimonial home<\/p>\n
4’~._lwit[ho1,1t \u00e9lfry valid reasons. She eoutinuetl to live with her parents<\/p>\n
8   joined the appellant only in June, 1988 at Delhi, where<\/p>\n
‘ ~.,\n<\/p>\n
-‘av! <\/p>\n
he was working at that time. ‘l’hereafter in July, 1989 again she<\/p>\n
went to Bangalore, started staying with her younger sister,-~–___ The<\/p>\n
appellant waited till Janiiary, 1991. Thereaifier issued<\/p>\n
notice to respondent complaining that she has been.-A\u00e9contuiiioiisiy ‘<\/p>\n
staying away from the matrimonial house, wi’thou’tV,any yaliid it<\/p>\n
reasons on more than one occasion, he ca\u00ablle(l_’_’i1por1llher to _\u00a7\u00aboivii-~<\/p>\n
in the niatrirnonial home within days,”\n<\/p>\n
3. The said notice  tiuiy i.,\u00abedp1i.ed.”by the respondent.
\nAround this time, theAappella..rit.:.was’posted.at’:.I:}@ga1ore, he was<\/p>\n
aiso aliotted an  ther_ea_fter”t-he respondent joined<\/p>\n
her husbarldv  in theniontii of January 1992. It
\nis the caseef the  iew days thereafter,  on
\n07.02.1992,thedbrotiier\u00a7–in\u00a51aw~’of his wife, Sri.Kad1reshan, who is
\n theV’a’ppell’a.nt, came to his quarters, abused him<\/p>\n
without 13ro9foeati.o1i while returning took the respondent also<\/p>\n
   came back later. It is stated that on few more<\/p>\n
Vdaoccasioras’ there was fight between the husband and wife, after<\/p>\n
“‘\u00aboou{3le Vloifweeks, again his wife left the matrimonial house on<\/p>\n
2’i”$\u00ab,–{)E’i;\u00a719Sl2 and did not return thereafter, which resuited in<\/p>\n
 appellant issuing another notice on 28.09.1992 which was duly<\/p>\n
‘”1\/**’i<\/p>\n
3,<\/p>\n
replied by the wife refusing to join him. In the meanwhile, the
\nrespondent. took up a job  a Teacher in Army School, Bangalore<\/p>\n
and eohtinued to live with her sister.\n<\/p>\n
4. It is the speci\ufb01c  of the appellant that <\/p>\n
is under the in\ufb02uence of her younger sister  V1–1.;i’sl)a.r.7i(:l’, <\/p>\n
hence she has no interest in joining the \u00ab;app’ellaht.,V<\/p>\n
matrimonial house and the respondent is\u00bb staying pa.l.;gfjg \\\u00a7vith.her’~..<\/p>\n
children in the house of her sister niueh\u00bb againstthef-wisl,1es of her<\/p>\n
husband. Further, the yotiriger  ..respondent and her<\/p>\n
husband is said to have no  such she has<\/p>\n
developed botlrchildren of the appellant and
\nthey are hold1ng~bacl\u00ab:,_th._e’.res~pond*ent and her children with them<\/p>\n
preven\ufb01ngthem  oonle and  the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
_   t.l1e_v “Said. proceedings, notice was served on<\/p>\n
,,,,___,;~espof1dent, she ~ent:ere(l appearance, filed counter stating that she<\/p>\n
.,ilpi’_:\u00ab..has_,pnot desetjted her husband, she has not walked out of the<\/p>\n
 IIlEL\ufb01iIl10.f\ufb02.al house voluntarily, the appellant himself has driven<\/p>\n
‘ f  out of the matrimonial house along with her children, as such<\/p>\n
 has taken shelter in the house of her younger sister at<\/p>\n
WE<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
}3a11g”al()re. At no point. of time earlier also she had voluntarily left
\nthe matrimonial house. A(:cor(:iir1g to her, the appellaxit being an
\nArmy Officer was on regular transfer from one place to another and<\/p>\n
as such residential accommoclati.on was not made available by the<\/p>\n
Army immediately on such t;r.2u1sier and as such she was “fo:’cer,l”to<\/p>\n
stay back with her parents whenever the appellant  V’<\/p>\n
from one place to another, such stay ot*th.e re’spohn(ie11tV”ir1:_’whe:j V<\/p>\n
parents house was at the instance of the”iap1:iellantllhereiii <\/p>\n
a voluntary decision of the resporideii\u00e9, It is _he;9(:ase..th\u00bbat at: L<\/p>\n
any given point, she has not stayeC1___away\u00bb\u00bbfroth the 1’natrirnoniaJ<\/p>\n
house for more than is or 2″”years–,   that she has<\/p>\n
continuously  house for four years
\nfrom 1976 “flo:r’\u00abanother two years in 1981 and
\ntwo Years     l  ll<\/p>\n
   ”   ease  is not interested in getting divorced<\/p>\n
from-.her  inteml to continue to live with him as his<\/p>\n
wife, she–,i_s e\\xeh_hL.ow willing to join the Inatrimonial house. It is<\/p>\n
L\/4.\/i__,f<\/p>\n
only her husband who has preveritetl her from going back to
\nrnatrinionial house. it is also denied by her that her brotheninwlaw<\/p>\n
has nourished illvwiii against: her husband. in the said petition,<\/p>\n
she filed Counter Claim under Section 23(a,) of the  M<\/p>\n
Act, seeking restitution of conjugal rights by  9 of -. <\/p>\n
the said Act.\n<\/p>\n
7. The petition which was,\u00bbi1iitially” ,:a1.)[.)e’;llaritj”‘e,<\/p>\n
herein was in M.C.No.668\/1992. SinCCCre_lltt.he sairi- filed
\nby the appellant within two  \ufb01foni  of the respondent
\nstaying separately from him, :bteehnie,al__l\u00a5:lefect regarding<\/p>\n
maintainability’;-V _   ‘–a;)1oeilar2.t’% \ufb01led a memo seeking
\npermission t:(}_’\ufb01l’e” asffjegifi-\u00bb withdrew the earlier petition
\n\ufb01led in M.C.No.V6-SS ‘Al-1′(2w\u00a7:ver, the counter claim filed by the<\/p>\n
respondent was pursued, separately.\n<\/p>\n
     the husband \ufb01led another petition in<\/p>\n
 the file of the Family Court, Bangalore,<\/p>\n
 dec,-~reeg_ of divorce against the respondent, on the ground of<\/p>\n
‘f_””e,rne~ity  also desertion.  pieaciings in the said petition was<\/p>\n
t”  niore or less same and the Statement of Objections which was \ufb01led<\/p>\n
by the wife is similar to the one she has filed in her c0u11t’er_claim.<\/p>\n
in M.C.Nc.668\/ I992, the said cmmter claim is rer11.1..rx.1,’i;~e_i””e:dwas<\/p>\n
M.C.No.Ii66\/2000. The Court. below clubbed bcth_—-fhe’i1i\u00e9i’t1;et*:~:.,T’ .<\/p>\n
based 0n the rival <:0nt'enti01'1s iii bothm the p'ef'fiti'0:f_ivs,7ira,1ne(i <\/p>\n
c0mmor1 issues to be decided which are  11r_i(ie.:': "<\/p>\n
i) Whether the V\u00bb -_:’1″0…\\.3V})0r1A.cie0r__1tV
\nM.C.N0. 1 166\/2000  d,eSerfe’L1. :  I hef”:\n<\/p>\n
husband intentierialiy  vi’iii.ae,’\u00bbvi’treated
\ncruelly and wheihei’.i_f};.e- ‘entitled
\nto seek (iijifcyce  1.V.’:${ of the<\/p>\n
ii) \\N’hei;i–1.erf_    the respondent<\/p>\n
   for  than two years\n<\/p>\n
5.: the’  __?vI..C.No.1166\/2000 to
\nsee’}:,4_decre’e _df.’di.vid:~.\u00a7\u00e9 Junder Section 13{1)(ia)<\/p>\n
– -of the $1.: :;ci’uv”M$i:~n\u00e9,ge Act’?\n<\/p>\n
 iiiir  the respondent\/wife who is the
\n‘V  ;\u00a7’eu;;:c{:ie;%1..in M.C.N0.1O55\/2000 is entitled to
\nSeelifcieicree for resiittuiorl of conjugal rights<\/p>\n
 H tifal\ufb01ihefi Section 9 0f the E-iindu Marriage Act’?<\/p>\n
A “:1?” H What Order’?\n<\/p>\n
Lei,<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
9. The Court’: below recorded common evidence in respect<\/p>\n
of both the petitions and the said evidence was reeo~rc_}1’egiC’~\u00bb.in<\/p>\n
M.C.No.1166\/2000. The appe\ufb02ant, who is   .\n<\/p>\n
M.C.No.’l166\/2000 examined himseif as  “_foi.ir* <\/p>\n
document.-s marked as Ziixs\u00e9”-1 t:o P4}. So.._far_”as–3the. res’pond:e.rit”eA<\/p>\n
M.C.No.1}66\/2000 is eonoerried, sf1e…exarninetl  as <\/p>\n
she did not produce any (i()(:ii;n”‘–~V”Judgment  passed in the aforesaid two petitions, has<\/p>\n
-. ..C’_j:.p.referred these two appeals.\n<\/p>\n
0  M.F.A.No.1212\/2005 is \ufb01led ehalleriging the Judgment<\/p>\n
00 a_ri'(1\u00bbv-Diettrtze dated 17.11200-4 on the ground that it is neither<\/p>\n
‘L1_:’x.-E<\/p>\n
E<\/p>\n
ll}<\/p>\n
sustainable in law nor on facts for the reason that the learriecl
\nJudge has not assigned any reasons for granting relief of<\/p>\n
restitution of conjugal rights. ‘lhe Trial Court has granted\u00bb the<\/p>\n
relief only on the ground that. the petition \ufb01led by <\/p>\n
seeking decree of divorce is rejected. ‘l’herei’70._re.-wiilioeit <\/p>\n
appreciating the evidence, it has zu,itomat.ic”aiiy.ailllower1jzthe 1\u00a7<eti'tio':}<\/p>\n
for restitution of conjugal rights and that A'<\/p>\n
also not appreciated the facts that–lh'e_Vresfionoent\/wife"tie:-jertecl"' V<\/p>\n
the appellant for several years, "failed to "apApre'ciate the
\nrespondent has not fulfilled ma;ri_ta;l'}Jol'igai:ion,V her continuous<\/p>\n
stay away from the matrimonial 'I?itorne\u00ab..Vamoants\u00bb' to desertion and<\/p>\n
depriving   lainounts to crueity which is
\nnot looked   Learned J udge has not taken
\ninto consid,eratiolri"ttie fact that attempts made by the husband
\n xwifellltlovlrriatrimonial house and also the attempt<\/p>\n
onllttiel  Wife to withdraw from the company of the<\/p>\n
 'husband is not considere(i.\n<\/p>\n
 ll.  also urged by the appellant that the Court below<\/p>\n
 has’al’so :i;()t looked into the  between  <\/p>\n
the respondent from the date of marriage, i.xe., till  date of
\nfiling petition wherein on   resnonderit has
\nlived separately and away fromithe  inspite of
\nthat the Court  conjugal rights to
\nprotect the interesyt  up already attained
\nmajority   the sake of the children
\nwho are already  “residing separately, the interest
\nof the huslsand iSl”uSal:v:”rif’i\u20ac’6\ufb01\\””. V<\/p>\n
     lylii’hllVNo.12i3\/2005 is concerned, wherein<\/p>\n
theAJdc}\u00abgmentfantl in M.C.No.1 166\/ 2000 is challenged, the<\/p>\n
 appellanthas’ Iirged the grounds which are more or less similar to<\/p>\n
“”l-1li.tj1:I.\u00a7\u00a7’l”‘.1{hichliirged in MFA No.1212\/2005. in addition he has<\/p>\n
l”=lsta.ted”tha}t the Court below has failed to take into consideration<\/p>\n
 ‘t1hf.:_r_e_f)<-raterzl desertion by the respondent with an intention to stay<\/p>\n
\u00a7-':\/ ii,\/3
\ni<\/p>\n
away from the matrimonial house. That he has also raised a
\nteehxlical objection that the Court below while ciismissirig the
\npetition in MC No.1 166\/20()O on the ground that the p21rt;ie.s–,i1ave<\/p>\n
not lived together for more than two years prior to \ufb01lir1_g_o'ftiiie"Vsaid<\/p>\n
petition, which according to him is incorrect. A(:eo__r(iir1g. to the V' <\/p>\n
appellant, earlier petition in M.C.No.668:\/ im992v_.ras fi;led"ifn_ <\/p>\n
1992 and at that time admiitecily the pa'i'ties_Vhave\u00bb'1;.,ot' l.iv*ed-;:a;part.u<\/p>\n
for more than 2 years to filing the"'Vpetitio11..  the<\/p>\n
appellant, subsequent \ufb01lingof petitiortiii"-~M.C.No.'G68i)l1992 the
\nappellant and respondent  their differences,<\/p>\n
Respondent has not\u00e9eame 1:;-aeitb to 1~;:at;=:;noniai"' house, they have<\/p>\n
not lived   thevllltime of filing the petition
\nNo.116e\/2060,' the – a';"s'f\u00a7jel_lar.1_tlA"~ar1d the respondent had lived<\/p>\n
separately _ for more the-.n l'two"'lyears. Therefore, the Judgment<\/p>\n
;plas–sed  Court loel'ow'Vholding that M.C.No.1l66\/2000 is in<\/p>\n
contiritriationof il'?1f';C:;1'Jo.668\/ 1.992 and to hold that prior to \ufb01ling of<\/p>\n
  they have not lived separately for more than 2<\/p>\n
 heneelllttie petition in M.C.N0.1166\/2000 is required to be<\/p>\n
'1."'\u00abri_is~e_t1isjsled..\u00abor1 that very ground is incorrect. Therefore the finding<\/p>\n
  givei'1 hey the Court below that lVl.C.No.i 166\/2()OO is continuation<\/p>\n
of 1ViC.No.668\/ 1992 is also incorrect. It is aise his case that the<\/p>\n
Court below has not appreciated the pleadings and evidei1_:c'e_< 2:.,_r1(i<\/p>\n
has not given proper finding while disposing of the  _<\/p>\n
\ufb01led by the appellant and respondent before the  * _  it<\/p>\n
13. After going through the \ufb01ridirigs A’ in Qititignieiit-..,,3}1e1.<\/p>\n
Decree of the Court below and the gijoshds ii;tt1e_Vap_peal”‘meii1o in’- V<\/p>\n
both appeals, the following poirits  i’or”eex:isi(Joeration in<\/p>\n
these appeals:\n<\/p>\n
i} Whether \u00ab     grheritv and
\nDecifee  b3t.:t;he….Coui~j~1; .]%)’eio{irVV– holding
\nthat the::.re\u00e9spoinieiit’:  ected the<\/p>\n
  eruevityv\ufb02 and has not<\/p>\n
:desei”ted.  is j   proper’?\n<\/p>\n
ii] V_ _Whether’ the (f0_tirt”ttbeiow was justified in
\n ciisinisstirig.the_.petition of the appellant]
\n seeking decree of divorce and<\/p>\n
 *  the petition \ufb01led by the<\/p>\n
\u00ab res;io_ntient\/wife seeking the relief of<\/p>\n
 i*est”i\u00e9t1tion of conjugal rights?\n<\/p>\n
A   What Order’?\n<\/p>\n
3.4<\/p>\n
Heard the counsel for ,Appellant. and Respondeiit ;’)eruse(.l the
\ngrozmcis of appeal, ilrlcling of the court below in the light of the
\npleadings, evidence anti rioeumerits on record. On appreeia”tio.o of
\nthe same this Court answers point Nos.1 and
\nconsideration, in the negative for the foilowing reasons; .  V’  it<\/p>\n
14. The fact that appellant and’Jres’p’o:iclent;’aAre1ai1us’l\ufb01’ani;\u00a7.<\/p>\n
and wife, their marriage took place on  1.31.974  the <\/p>\n
of elders in the family, at the tin1–e:”of marriages  was<\/p>\n
working in Indian Army and he wasl’s’tatior1ea:1_ in North Iridia is not<\/p>\n
in dispute. It is also not in  Zjreutnediateiy after the<\/p>\n
marriage respozldent w’e.n_t  ‘joit1er.l..Vhirn. Thereafter, she got
\nconceived iii; 1975their-\u00bb.\ufb01rst”lehiid; a son was born is also not in<\/p>\n
dispute. Theu”appellant’.h’as_”_.’oVstated that thereafter for small<\/p>\n
Vglifferenees responclent ‘left gxnatrimonial house in December 1976<\/p>\n
 notjoin. till January 1981. After she came back in<\/p>\n
1981  delivered a female child in 1982. It is his<\/p>\n
case that while “she was pregnant she left the house and she never<\/p>\n
 ‘eail*n<:"ha_ek till January 1984. 'l'hou.gh she came back in January<\/p>\n
 j..gfss4fshe" stayed with him :11] May 1985 and from May 1985 to<\/p>\n
1 \u00a7Iur.1e"1988 she was residing with her parents. From June 1988 to<\/p>\n
3\u00a7…\u00a2'J\u00a3___\/E<\/p>\n
ed own irffetrietfably.\n<\/p>\n
E5<\/p>\n
July 1990 she stayed with him. Again in 1990 she left the house
\nto come back only in January .1992. Front January 1.9942.pt.o.,_9May<\/p>\n
1993 she was residing in matrimonial house.<\/p>\n
15. in the month of May there  p_figl’1t;\u00ab <\/p>\n
appellant, respondent, her sister and;.__ l:5r_ot:her\u00a5in,-law,. <\/p>\n
resulted in appellant \ufb01l.ir1g_\u00a7 (:()r.r1pla,i:fitb at 9. \u00a33.iap–pa’r__1al’1alli”’ l5olice”<\/p>\n
Station, wherein the police’ ,_have..t”fc:eorde’d_.’ stateinent of both
\nappellant and respondent.     January 1991
\nappellant had issueda    his wife to come
\nand join him, she   In January 1992
\nshe came    there was light between
\nappellant oiione  sister and brothenin-law on
\nother side res1llti,r1gv.in’  between the parties breaking<\/p>\n
 ‘appel_1~ant has adduced evidence in support of his<\/p>\n
ha’ ”<\/p>\n
n\u00b0’pieading.s, wl1erein he has re–iterated the entire pleadings in<\/p>\n
” ifsaipport of xnisi’ Case. To substantiate same he has produced copy of<\/p>\n
A ‘[1(7ll;ll()(%’iS\u00a7.t’l\u20ac3(,l in 1991 as Ex.I:’],. The complaint. that was lodged by<\/p>\n
  before Biappanahalli police on 8.2.1992. is at Ex.P3. l\u00a7x.l”4 is<\/p>\n
56<\/span><\/p>\n
the second notice issueczl by hini calling upon his wife to come and<\/p>\n
join, for which the reply given by resporiclent is l\u00a7x.P5. ‘lTl1e..t\u00a7ta;;iy’._g()i”<\/p>\n
the statement given by respondent to Bia.ppanahal_ifpoliee_’:\u00ab:uf1<\/p>\n
26.6.1992 is Ex.P6. The contents of themsaicl ticjeariienteielearly’  <\/p>\n
support his case.\n<\/p>\n
17. The aforesaid docunients’=..glisclose that i’rn1nediately*. 9′<\/p>\n
after the \ufb01ght between appellant aI.1tl..re;s’pot1(lent.  l\\:zflay_\u20acl992 and
\nafter issue of legal notice to  and getting the
\nreply vide Ex.P5, apraeilant rleeree of divorce
\nin the year 1992.   for \ufb01ling said
\npetition is __1fefu’s’a.1:::~– tot? join the appellant in<\/p>\n
matrimonial} home  seen from her reply dated<\/p>\n
16.9.1992, which is es; _r\u00a7:;;p.5}”‘e-newever, when the appellant \ufb01led<\/p>\n
the  seeking dissoI11:’a:.ion of marriage between himself and<\/p>\n
resp.ond,ent._\ufb01 Sgnel\ufb01les 3. counter claim under Section 23–.A of the<\/p>\n
Hi11de1_Ae’Iv.w”seel:ir1g restitutior1 of conjugal rights. The<\/p>\n
earlier ;5et.iti:;)ri  by the husband \/ appellant in MC.No.668\/ 1992<\/p>\n
taken baek by him for the reason that the same was not \ufb01led<\/p>\n
  “tw’o years from the (late of alleged desertion from his wife.<\/p>\n
in’ -the rneanwhiie, the counter claim of the respondent was re-<\/p>\n
numbered as M.C.No.1 O55 \/ 2000 and the same was treated as a<\/p>\n
petition under Section E) for restitution of eongugal rights.<\/p>\n
18. The exnoenee on record clearly diseiose tl\ufb01alt tron:  V’<\/p>\n
date of rnarrieige between the parties,’;'”A\\”vi’;i(:1″1 took’-vp1aee\ufb02Eor’i..<\/p>\n
24.11.1974 en 1992 they have hardly residrerl~–to:gether.for  _<\/p>\n
to 6 years. Though the respondent ‘h:a.s\u00bb.e(ler1ied__ st.ayi*gg*.\u00a7’\u00e9f>arately ” 8<\/p>\n
between 1974 and 1978 andzmibsequeriitiigrl111 198a0″s~~.;.1e.,.\u00ab,’\u00a7 between
\n198 1 to 1984 and 1985 to    for the reason of
\nnon availability of   on record to
\nshow either in or  show that she
\ncontinued    1974 to 1979 and on
\nsubsequeritrlates  she stayed away from the<\/p>\n
matrimonial hoxlrlne-lat  instarlee of appellant, who has refused to<\/p>\n
Vteeke her~’1:iael_{} On \u00e9oing___t_hrougl1 the reply sent by her vide Ex.P5<\/p>\n
to’.f;he;V1’egal notieelt is clearly seen that after 18 years of marriage<\/p>\n
  Vfor the1.’1rs’t t’irne*L–res.f$onder1t has raised an allegation of dernand for<\/p>\n
 dowry. .4Ev.en.’Vt1’ioi1gl1  has levelled said allegation against her<\/p>\n
 Vhzlsbarid, she has not substantiated the same either in her<\/p>\n
.8 eV’i–der1ee’t)r by exaniining any ira(.1epenc1er’it witnesses, in support of<\/p>\n
19. Admittedly, the respondent has stayed with her sister<\/p>\n
and brother-indaw for a long time after she left her h11St3aii1d,l.”ii}<\/p>\n
one place of her evidence she says that she had been  ~<\/p>\n
house of her brother~in~law at the iristanceof her it l1\u20ac_1:shan(l., in <\/p>\n
another place in her evidence sh.e state that  was driven :f)’1.l’C’\u00e9,)f<\/p>\n
matrimonial house, hence she wasVgi_\\fe.:f1 shelter by h_er~.brothe3r–in- _ V ><\/p>\n
law. So also in the statement n1ade_:by__lier be.fo\u00a2”PHv..t1Liv\u00a7Arfipo1ice on
\n26.6.1992 she admits that  in the house of
\nher sister and her ma\ufb02irhonial   COIIiII10tl0I1 she
\nleft the matrimonial.  most of the things
\nthat are belongin’gVtoV’l3e’rV:   pleading and evidence, it is
\nseen prior    house her son was already<\/p>\n
in the house other sister: \u00b0  the \ufb01ght between her husband<\/p>\n
 herselfvstie left thetnatrimonial house with her belongings to<\/p>\n
stay  her,s.i:slter__ and brother–ih–1a,w. Though she stated that<\/p>\n
V therehiass  threat to her life from the date of marriage<\/p>\n
 till 199i’ wl*ien’she was staying with appellant off and off there is<\/p>\n
‘eednoit, even alsingle letter, correspondence by respondent with her<\/p>\n
 -pl.arents’Aand sister. To substantiate the same, similarly there are<\/p>\n
“–\u00abno'”coniplaints either to the police or to anybody to any of the<\/p>\n
“”1<\/p>\n
I9<\/p>\n
elders in the family in this liiehali”. The responclent has not<\/p>\n
atldneecl evidence of independent witriesses either of her or<\/p>\n
brother~iI1~law or some other welbwisher who kn.oI%__I ahVojg’,1i;_T  <\/p>\n
appellant and respondent. to speak about.Wthe al1e’gecl—- :ill:tre21t.n1e.nt.” *<\/p>\n
meted out to her by her lriusband.\n<\/p>\n
20. The evidence on record*:(_lisclose’that Vthevilapipellant lias\ufb02.<\/p>\n
taken steps calling upon his wife   rnatrirnonial
\nhome through legal notice in   in 1992. The
\nreply sent by respondent,  that she had
\nno interest in   of time. The said<\/p>\n
reply and the  u:\u00a71a<:1"e"~':o'f;33f"1';er Vlioefore police which is at<\/p>\n
Ex.P6 establishes  :rea:s'onabIe doubt that respondent left<\/p>\n
matrimonial house under '\u00a3.l1e.'i"r_.':lluence of her sister and brother<\/p>\n
in glaw.  leaving hoagse in the month of May 1992 she took<\/p>\n
awagf  hverbailiher belongings and her children after lodging a<\/p>\n
coinplaintpeiv&ithj_~poli(':e against her husband and also giving a<\/p>\n
 statement to*–.thev police in respect of the compliant that was given<\/p>\n
 "'oy"hin:  her brot'her~in~1aw.\n<\/p>\n
Mi<\/p>\n
’20<\/p>\n
21. Per contra, the complaint given by appellant against the<\/p>\n
brother-in-law of respondent he has not made any<\/p>\n
frivolous aliegation against the respondent, he has aiscdnot: ~<\/p>\n
suspect her character or foist false ci1aijges_ aga_%nst”‘her.  his ‘A ”<\/p>\n
grievance is that his wife’s sister and b.f\u00a7)ther>i:’1~law are ti3fingiA::to<\/p>\n
control the life of respondent and her’ \u00abc_hildrer1,’ ‘oeirigj ‘iri.\ufb01:.1.er1ceci by.’ V 9<\/p>\n
their advise his wife is not staying   respondent
\ndenied the same, she hasi’-\u00ab.._n’Jt’ .ind.ependent witness
\nthrough her sister orJorothereinslavvV-.to. same. On the
\ncontrary she waits    for divorce and
\nthereafter, by   tiled an application for
\nrestitution   reading of the evidence also
\nclearly discloses time when the petition was<\/p>\n
pending h_usban.rl_was readv and willing to take the respondent<\/p>\n
 .hoine  aeven  several atterngits were made by<\/p>\n
apnellan-tifbr::s*ettlei;aerit she has not shown inclination to settle the<\/p>\n
 A’f’\u00abherefore;4j’;tne conduct of respondent clearly shows that the<\/p>\n
~ \u00ab3.j’j;eon’riter ciairrr that was raised by her in MC.No.668\/1992 is<\/p>\n
 ljlgli a counter blast to the petition \ufb01led by her husband<\/p>\n
 seeking decree of divorce.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
22. The Iriaterial on record clearly (‘iis(:losee that the eoriduet
\nof respondent. in depriving her husband her company for more<\/p>\n
thail 12 years out of .18 years of their rnarrieri life  on t4lI(?V’d_”c:it~’,V3_ of<\/p>\n
filing of the petition for divorce in 1992 and thereaftergiurefuleing  _<\/p>\n
attempts of settlement on one hand and \ufb01ghtingt}-re Afileo’\u00abV.<\/p>\n
by her husband for divorce with a counter g:lairr1 for .restitu’ti_on,.oi”<\/p>\n
conjugal rights, amounts to crueIty,__ Wh’en”tl1e  <\/p>\n
stayed away for such a long time  any  reason denying
\nher company to her hiishrhi\u00e9i, a1_i(i.de–i1ying  right for
\nconjugal right, clearly 1r1clioate’sV’  respondent in<\/p>\n
deliberately staying”  arhotrrit\u00e9 to  and also cruelty.<\/p>\n
The eviderroe  rlieneloses that she has been ably
\nsupported  15\u00a2; sist_er:.d:.’ar1’_ti–._gb’r<other–in–law through out. The<\/p>\n
respondent\/wife the appellant through out and her<\/p>\n
*apV"p.ellantl  also welfare of her children. The Court<\/p>\n
below has"  "appifeciate2('l the entire oral and documentary<\/p>\n
'"*~'evidenoe__availaloie, on record, it has e.rror1eously proceeded on the<\/p>\n
-<.l.\/'.jAj}:;re1nise thatg__ti1ere is desertion on the part of appellant believing<\/p>\n
 of respomlent\/wife that the appellant. has sent her<\/p>\n
i'\u00ab~.,\u00bb~-\/1;\n<\/p>\n
out of the matrirnonial house, as such. she has takeri shelter in the<\/p>\n
house of her sister and brot:her–in–law.<\/p>\n
23. The court below has failed to appreciate <\/p>\n
exchanged between the parties, the contents  ‘<\/p>\n
complaint and the statement \ufb01led by tine \u00bbparties.’th.e police by<\/p>\n
station and also the pleadings in the Ilieytitiorr <\/p>\n
beyond all reasonable doubt t.l1atll.r\u00e9:spon(lent  <\/p>\n
deliberately’ stayed away from__ the yrnatrirnomal housevywithrout there
\nbeing any valid reason. On tof} Tot’-that:vsheyis”‘also contesting the<\/p>\n
petition by \ufb01ling counter claim-for conjugal rights<\/p>\n
when she herself. tovgo to matrirnoriial house by
\nsending reply’ to the   E\u00a7x.P5.\n<\/p>\n
24.’;”1’h.erefore,,A _i’r’aV” the light of the above observation, this<\/p>\n
Court is of the opinion that there is error on the part of the court<\/p>\n
belowyirr apprergiatiion” of the pl.eacl1ngs and evidence available as<\/p>\n
record. ‘*\u00ab\u00ab’.I’he__refore it has come to a wrong conclusion that the<\/p>\n
it 1appellant\/respontlent has not made out a case for grant of decree<\/p>\n
 for and on the contrary the respondent was always ready<\/p>\n
to a1’1d_,V_willir1g to join her husband and continue to discharge her<\/p>\n
Q4\u00bb\/5\/\\-i<\/p>\n
{J
\n1;.)<\/p>\n
marital obligation to the appellant and thereby wrongly dismissed
\nhusbands petition. for divorce znid by allowing countt-%r (2\u00a7\u00a33.iIVli_”fi1v_’V;3(i<\/p>\n
by wife passed the order of restitution of conjugal rightsf’ \u00ab  ._  \u00bb<\/p>\n
25. For the foregoing reasons, this” Co.ur;. al_.l0_\\}v-v’.b0Vt11.:’1hx\u20ac–.<\/p>\n
appeals filed by the appellarity allsiyifxg  his’ <\/p>\n
MC.No.1166\/2000 for ciecree oi*’–v..;(:1’i=.rrce:” velrliii ‘co\u00a71s\u00e9q’u\u00e9i1t1y, ” V<\/p>\n
dismissing the petition  of  VV”-rtgsporicicrmt.\/Wife in<\/p>\n
MC.N0.1055\/ 2000 for restit.1iiib;1’  without any<\/p>\n
order as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P … vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K … on 24 December, 2010 Author: K.L.Manjunath & S.N.Satyanarayana IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY or DECEMBER 2om.V_j PRESENT THE HoN*Bx,E MR. JUSTICE K,L,VMANJUN’A’fH ~ AND THE HONBLE MR. JUSTIC:-:’_ S.,n.sATYkaNMIg\ufb01r;INA […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-179284","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCol K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P ... vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K ... on 24 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P ... vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K ... on 24 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-12-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-24T05:09:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"22 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\\\/O P … vs Smt Valli W \\\/O Col K … on 24 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-24T05:09:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":4218,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010\",\"name\":\"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\\\/O P ... vs Smt Valli W \\\/O Col K ... on 24 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-24T05:09:53+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\\\/O P … vs Smt Valli W \\\/O Col K … on 24 December, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P ... vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K ... on 24 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P ... vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K ... on 24 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-24T05:09:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"22 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P … vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K … on 24 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-24T05:09:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010"},"wordCount":4218,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010","name":"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P ... vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K ... on 24 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-24T05:09:53+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-murugaiah-retd-so-p-vs-smt-valli-w-o-col-k-on-24-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Col K Murugaiah (Retd) S\/O P … vs Smt Valli W \/O Col K … on 24 December, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179284","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=179284"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179284\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=179284"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=179284"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=179284"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}