K PADMAJA Vs. K VENUGOPAL REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The said OP was allowed by order dated 28/11/2001, and aggrieved by the same the wife/the respondent in the said OP filed this appeal. This Court, while admitting the appeal, granted interim stay of operation of the said order, and thereafter, the notice by substituted service was ordered and after service of the notice, certain interim directions were also issued, as the respondent did not choose to appear and contest the said application. Though this case has been taken up for hearing on several occasions, none appeared for the respondent.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that his marriage took place with the respondent on 08/08/1993 at TTD Kalyana Mandapam, Gudiwada of Krishna District as per Hindu rights and customs and their marriage was consummated. Immediately after the marriage, the respondent joined his company at Lingamguntla Agraharam, Narsaraopet Mandal, Guntur District, and both of them lived together till they shifted to Hyderabad on 18/06/1994 and started their marital life at Hyderabad. Out of their wedlock, one son was born on 02/01/1995 at the parents' house of the respondent at Bethavolu, Gudiwada Mandal, Krishna District. Both of them lived at Hyderabad from 18/06/1994 to 12/08/1994 and thereafter, the respondent left the company of the petitioner, without informing him, and after making searches for some days, he came to know that she was with her parents. His mother went to bring her on 10/12/1994 and again his parents went to the respondent on 02/01/1995 when the child was born, but she refused to return to the society of the petitioner and she also refused to live with his parents. The petitioner himself went to the parents of the respondent on 17/01/1995 but she bluntly refused to accompany him. Again he sent his mother and others on 10/02/1995, 26/05/1995, 02/06/1995, but there was no response from her. He himself again went to get her to his society on 05/06/1995 but she again refused. She not only refused but assaulted and abused him in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences if he comes again to take her to his society. As such, he has sent his cousin Nagireddy/P.W.3 and his friend Ramana Reddy on 15/02/1996, but the respondent failed to respond to the requests of the aforesaid persons and he again went along with Nagireddy to the respondent on 23/03/1996 to persuade her, but she bluntly refused to come and join his society. Lastly, he along with his parents and his cousin Nagireddy/P.W.3 and Ramana Reddy went to the parents' house of the respondent and requested her to join the society of the petitioner, but she refused and abused the persons who persuaded her and threatened with dire consequences. It is stated that in spite of repeated requests and attempts made by the petitioner, the respondent never responded to his requests and the mediators'. As such, he is living separately from 27/06/1997. It is stated that the respondent's parents are rich compared to the family of the petitioner and she is having the habit of luxurious life and could not accustom with the limited income and expenditure. It is stated that she was having friendships with highly placed people and also living in the midst of rich circle at Bethavolu, Gudiwada Mandal, Krishna District. It is stated that as the respondent lived with him only for 56 days i.e., from 18/06/1994 to 12/08/1994, the day on which she left the company of the petitioner, while they were living in Hyderabad, the birth of his child on 02/01/1995 clearly shows and creates a shadow on the birth of the child. Therefore, the petitioner believed that the respondent is not interested to live in his society and also dislikes to lead a respectable family life with the petitioner and the attitude of the respondent disclosed that she is not interested to live in his society for no fault of him, making him to suffer his family life.

(3.) A counter has been filed denying all the allegations made in the OP while admitting their marriage on 08/08/1993 at Gudiwada of Krishna District and also about the consummation of the marriage and the birth of the son on 02/01/1995 and joining the petitioner at his residence Lingamguntla Agraharam immediately after marriage on 08/08/1993 till they left for Hyderabad on 18/06/1994. Thus, it is not in dispute that both of them lived in the house of the petitioner's parents immediately from the marriage i.e., from 08/08/1993 till they left to Hyderabad on 18/06/1994 i.e., for about ten months and thereafter lived together for a period about two months in Hyderabad. But she denies the allegation that she herself left the company of the petitioner on 12/08/1994 and it is stated that he himself driven her out from his home on 12/08/1994 demanding more money and other articles from her parents and therefore, she had no other alternative but to go her parents house as she did not know anybody in Hyderabad. All other allegations that his mother, himself and others came to her parents house to take her for the conjugal society of the petitioner were denied. It is stated that the petitioner never visited her even when the child was born. It is stated that neither the respondent nor her parents never refused for the request of the petitioner, his parents and the relatives to join her the company of her husband. On the other hand, it is stated that she herself tried through elders to join his company but all the efforts have become in vain. The other allegations that she made an attempt to assault the petitioner and abused him in filthy language and threatened with dire consequences are all denied stating that the said allegations are absolutely false, baseless and are fabricated for the purpose of petition. It is stated that the OP filed by the petitioner is cooked up and created one filed with an oblique motive to obtain divorce so that he can go for second marriage where he can get substantial amount of dowry. The petitioner himself threatened her many times since she was unable to fulfill the demand of the petitioner for more money. The other allegation that she used to have luxurious life in her parents house and therefore she is not prepared to live in the company of the husband is denied and it is stated that the petitioner himself used to live extravagant life. It is stated that she is always interested to join the company of the petitioner for living the rest of the life with the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner, his parents and relatives are responsible for driving out her from out of her matrimonial life and they are only at fault but not she as she was unable to get more dowry from her parents. It is stated that the petitioner and his parents are only interested in the property given to her by her parents. It is stated that she is interested to live with the petitioner alone and she never deserted the petitioner as alleged but the petitioner himself drove her out of the house. It is stated that having lived with her for 56 days at Hyderabad, he himself drove her out of the house and chosen to make damaging remarks against her about the birth of the child which clearly shows the mean mentality of the petitioner who can stoop down to any level to get the divorce from her.