ANIL KUMAR Vs. SREELATHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the petitioner in O.P No.204/2003 on the files of the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram who is confronting with the impugned judgment dismissing the said original petition. The aforesaid petition was filed under Sec.13 (1) , 1(a) and 1(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking a decree granting divorce. The brief facts of the averments in the petition are as follows:

(2.) The respondent filed objection denying all the allegations, cruelties and desertion alleged against her. According to her, the allegations of withdrawal from co-habitation made without any basis. She expressed her willingness to go and reside with the petitioner during the pendency of OP No.358/2000 filed by the petitioner herein. But, the petitioner was not ready and willing to take her back to his home. The attempt of the petitioner was only to get rid of the respondent and minor child. The respondent and minor child were subjected to harassment by the petitioner and her mother-in-law and mentally challenged sister-in-law who are living with the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner was a mute spectator of the malaign statement spoken by his mother and his sister. When her life in the house of the petitioner became miserable she ran away from the house in the night of 13.9.1998. The respondent was forced to leave her matrimonial home late hours of the night due to the ill-treatment from the part of the petitioner and other family members of the house. He refused to take back the respondent and the child when she expressed her willingness to go back along with the petitioner. The court never advised the petitioner to file petition seeking for divorce. The petitioner himself abandoned OP No.358/2000 in the course of proceedings. Thus there was no valid ground for divorce hence he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

(3.) On the aforesaid rival contentions both parties adduced evidence and evidence which consists of PW1 to PW4 and RW1 and Ext A1 to A8, B1, B2 and X1 to X2. On appreciation of the aforesaid evidence on record the Family Court rejected the claim for divorce on a finding that the petitioner miserably failed to prove the grounds raised in the petition. The legality and the correctness for the said finding has come up in this appeal.