H.T. VEERA REDDI Vs. KISTAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C .M.A. No. 348 of 1972 is against I.A. No. 2209 of 1971, on the file of the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, and C.R.P. No. 751 of 1972 is against I.A. No. 11534 of 1971, on the file of the same Court. Both the above I.As. were filed in O.P. No. 48 of 1971. O.P : No. 48 of 1971 now pending before the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, is a petition for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act XXV of 1955. It was filed by the appellant, Dr. H.T. Veera Reddi, for getting the society of his Wife Kistamma, the respondent, and her daughter by name Babarethinamma.

(2.) THERE is a long history behind between the parties prior to the filing of O.P. N0.48 of 1971. Their marriage took place as early as 1943 and according to Kistamma, a daughter was born to them on 23rd December, 1958. Dr. H.T. Veera Reddi filed O.P. No. 63 of 1960 on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras, for divorce, alleging adultery and desertion on the part of his wife, Kistamma. On the dismissal of that O.P. for divorce, C.M.A. No. 83 of 1961 was filed in this Court and that was also dismissed. In L.P.A. No. 31 of 1964, of this Court, Dr. H.T. Veera Reddi was granted judicial separation. On further appeal by Kistamma to the Supreme Court in C.A. No. 1149 of 1969 the Supreme Court, by judgment dated 24th March, 1970, rejected the charges of adultery and immorality and desertion made against Kistamma and also negatived the contention of Dr. H.T. Veera Reddi regarding legitimacy of Babarethinamma. Subsequent to the judgment of the Supreme Court, notices seem to have passed between the parties, and Kistamma filed O.P. No. 25 of 1970, on the file of the Sub Court at Adoni for maintenance for herself and her daughter, claiming past maintenance of Rs. 36,000 and future maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,000 per month from the date of petition. During January, 1(571, Dr. H.T. Veera Reddi preferred O.P. No. 48 of 1971 before the City Civil Court, Madras, under Section 9 (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights.

(3.) IN O.P. No. 48 of 1971, Dr. H.T. Veera Reddi has inter alia alleged: ...His married life until now was one of misery. The several charges levelled against the petitioner by the respondent were the result of certain interested third parties being bent on ruining the career of the petitioner. The respondent made several reckless accusations against the petitioner and even went to the length of charging the petitioner of having a desire to marry another wife and that with a view to achieve that object, was anxious to get the respondent divorced. The history of events have shown that these accusations are all false. The petitioner has been, though married several years ago, constrained to live singly for several years in view of the intransigent and obstructive attitude of the respondent. He has undergone agony for several years. ...His offer to take back the respondent is perfectly bona fide and the petitioner is ready and willing to forget and forgive all that had happened and is desirous of having the consortium of the respondent. ...The petitioner is only ready and willing to receive back the respondent and the child and to acknowledge the child as his, so as to enable the respondent and the child to have future status and happiness in life. The petitioner and respondent are closely related and the petitioner is also anxious to uphold the dignity and reputation of the family of both the petitioner and the respondent. On the above allegations, Dr. H.T. Veera Reddi has prayed for restitution of conjugal rights.