JYOTHL V Vs. V SURESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a matrimonial dispute arising out of a petition filed by the husband, respondent herein, seeking judicial separation from his wife under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Court below by order dated 2nd July 1997 in O.P. No.211 of 1996 ordered judicial separation. Being aggrieved by that order, the respondent-wife, who is appellant herein, preferred this appeal.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are as follows: On 9-2-1992, the marriage between appellant and the respondent herein was performed at Mahboob Mansion, Tarnaka, Secunderabad. It was a love marriage performed according to the Hindu customs and rites. The marriage was consummated, but no children were bom to them. Both the parties known each other prior to their marriage. The respondent-husband hails from Mudaliar community, and the appellant-wife is Naidu by caste. At the time of marriage, the appellant herein, who is an Engineering graduate, was employed in Advanced Radio Mast Limited and the respondent herein is a Diploma holder in Printing Technology.

(3.) The respondent-husband stated that the appellant-wife suffering from acute form of rheumatic arthritis involving severe pain in joints and insisting the husband to shift her to her mother's place at Warasiguda, and that she used to indulge in offensive and indecent language while addressing not only her husband but also his parents. Further, the appellant-wife also used to visit her mother's rented house without the permission of the husband and used to come late in the night; that though the appellant was getting a monthly salary of Rs.5,000/-, she was hardly spending anything for the maintenance of the house and that the respondent further attributed recalcitrant and stubborn attitude of the wife and her aggressive and irresponsible conduct and that he addressed a letter to her brother seeking intervention and that there was no response to the said letter and having come to know about the letter written by the respondent-husband, the appellant became offensive and picked up quarrels at frequent intervals and she started saying that the petitioner is unfit to be her husband and she is not interested in staying with him as his wife and that the appellant-wife went to the extent of removing her "Thali" from her neck and threw it out and she left the house on 12th December, 1993 around 7.00 p.m. On 4th December, 1993, she returned to his house. But she did not ask the husband where he had gone and where he had his dinner. She did not prepare any dinner to the respondent. On 15th December, 1993 at about 3.00 a.m. the appellant woke the respondent from sleep and questioned him as to where he had gone and where he spent two days. The appellant started abusing the respondent and his relations in filthy language. When the respondent refused to react, the appellant pushed him from the bed and started abusing that he does not react to her provocations and that he is more like an errand-boy rather than her husband. The respondent-husband addressed a letter - Ex.A-1 dated 15-3-1993 to the wife asking her to agree for mutual divorce in order to avoid embarrassment for both. The said letter was sent by Registered Post and also Under Certificate of Posting to ensure its delivery on her residential address as well as at her mother's place at Mettuguda. Though the appellant received the said letter, she deliberately chose to remain silent for the reasons best known to her. It is further stated that his wife was nagging and causing irritation and interfering in his business. The appellant's brother came from America and the respondent approached him to sort out the matter and in spite of it, the strained relation continued and the reconciliation effort failed. Further, the respondent-husband alleged that the appellant is bent upon implicating him in criminal cases on false allegations and even threatened him of such action and miserable consequences. Thus the respondent-husband attributed mental torture and cruelty on the part of the appellant wife and prayed the Court to grant judicial separation.