T.B. UDAYA SHANKAR ARADHYA S/O. LATE T.B. BASAVARADHYA Vs. SMT. T.U. SHOBHA ARADHYA, W/O UDAYA SHANKAR ARADHYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the Appellant is directed against the judgment and Decree dated 02/12/2006 passed in M.C. No. 5/2000 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) and CJM. Tumkur.

(2.) THE Appellant herein has filed a petition before the Court below under Section - 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, seeking a direction to the Respondent to join his company by means of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights or in the alternative, for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce, contending that, they are the husband and wife, their marriage was solemnized on 30.6.1983 as per their customs, out of the said wedlock, they got two children, namely, Shruthi and Seema and their second daughter Seema died on 16.3.1992 and first daughter is deaf. Further, it is the case of the Appellant that, Respondent is the daughter of his elder sister and he was working as a Lecturer in SIT, Tumkur. Due to differences of opinion between them, their relation was strained and Respondent left her matrimonial home by deserting him without any reasons and staying with her parents, that too, without informing him. Thereafter, Appellant made all his sincere efforts to bring her back, but she refused to join him. Therefore, Appellant has issued legal notice calling upon the Respondent to join him, but there is no positive Respondent from the Respondent. Hence, he filed a petition before the Court below under Section -9 of Hindu Marriage Act. The said petition had come up for consideration before the Court below. In response to the notice issued, Respondent appeared through her counsel, filed her statements denying all the allegations made in the petition and set up a plea of cruelty against, the Appellant. To prove their cases, Appellant has examined himself as PW1, got marked Exs.P1 to P8 and Respondent got examined herself as DW1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P5. The Court below, in turn, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence and other materials available on file, has framed necessary issues for its consideration and dismissed the said petition by its judgment dated 2nd December 2006. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order passed by the Court below, Appellant has presented this appeal.

(3.) AFTER careful perusal of the impugned judgment and order passed by the Court below, we do not find any error of law, much less material irregularity, as such, committed by the Court below in dismissing the petition filed by the Appellant. The Court below, after considering the relevant material available on file, after analyzing the oral and documentary evidence and also taking into consideration the relationship between the parties, has recorded the finding of fact that Appellant has failed to make out any case to entertain the relief relief sought by him, on the ground that, except making oral submissions, he has not produced any authenticated documents or adduced any independent evidence to prove his case. The said finding of fact recorded by the Court below is just and proper and therefore, interference by this Court is uncalled for. Even the Appellant has not made out any good grounds before this Court to entertain the relief sought by him. Hence, we decline to entertain the relief sought. in this appeal.