T APPARAO Vs. T SHYAMALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal purportedly under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act by the husband aggrieved against the Judgment and Decree in O.P.494 of 1999, dated 26-9-2002, on the file of the Family Court at Visakhapatnam dismissing the petition filed by him against the respondent/wife under Section 13 (1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking for decree of divorce.

(2.) The facts in brief, giving rise to this present proceedings are, that in the said petition it is alleged that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent took place on 21-11-1993 at Peda Gantyada as per the Hindu Customs and rites and it was consummated, and they lived at Visakhapatnam. However, the respondent/wife herein was counting everything in terms of money and is adamant and is suspicious. She never lived with the appellant continuously for a period of more than two months. She used to go to her parents house and the appellant had to bring her back. Even though the appellant has set up a separate residence as per her wishes and for the welfare, the respondent/wife did not mend her ways. They were blessed with a son on 28-5-1995 and a daughter on 2-7-1996. In view of the aforesaid acts on the part of the respondent/wife and the attribution of illicit intimacy against the appellant with other woman, threatening the appellant with her relatives who are working in the police, forcing the appellant to go to Gulf country and trying to come out with all false tales, including her romance with one broker in the passport office and one Venkatesh, who is an attender in the house of the appellant's father, has caused mental agony to the appellant and he has become absent minded and it has resulted in an accident whereby he suffered a fracture to the right little finger. In view of her typical attitude and there being no change, the appellant sought for divorce.

(3.) Contesting the case, the respondent in the counter affidavit totally denied each and every allegation and further attributed the allegation of beating her brutally and her sister-in-law Ramanamma and others. That apart, she referred to several other instances and intervention of the elders. It is the appellant, who had been creating nasty scenes and nothing as such can be attributed against the respondent herein, and therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances stated in the counter affidavit, she sought for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. Subsequently, the Court below framed the points for consideration to the following effect: