SIDDASHETTY Vs. RAJAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant and respondent were married in the year 1994. The case of the husband is that after the marriage they lived happily for sometime. That the respondent/wife would constantly use abusive language against him and she left him and went to her parental house. Thereafter, a legal notice was issued by the husband calling upon her to come back to the marital home. She did not do so. Hence, he filed the instant petition under Section- 13(i-a)(i-b) seeking dissolution of his marriage. By the impugned order, the Family Court dismissed the petition. Hence, the present appeal the Husband. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set-aside. That the trial court failed to consider the material and evidence let-in by the appellant. The respondent is served and unrepresented.

(2.) On hearing the learned counsel and examining the records, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in this appeal. The ground that is urged for dissolution of marriage is desertion and cruelty. That she would constantly abuse the husband. That she would treat him with cruelty; that she did not show any love and affection towards him or towards his parents. Expect these self-serving testimonies; no acceptable evidence has been led-in to establish the same.

(3.) On the other hand, the respondent-wife contends that she was driven out of the house and she is forced to live with her parents. 'That there was demand for dowry by the husband. It is her specific case that the mother and the sister of the husband were also residing in the same house along with them. That he has married one Madamma, who is the daughter of his sister Shivamma and he is living with her.