METHUKU SURESH ALAIS SURESH SAGAR Vs. METHUKU ANURADHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order and decree dated 22.01.2001 passed in OP No.121 of 1998 by the Judge, Family Court at Secunderabad, whereby and where under, the petition filed by the appellant / husband under Sections 13(1)(ia) & (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking a decree of divorce by dissolving the marriage with the respondent / wife was dismissed. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they were arrayed before the Court below.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are as follows:- THE petitioner is the husband of the respondent. THEir marriage was solemnized on 04.02.1990 as per Hindu rites and customs at Hyderabad. After the marriage, the respondent joined the petitioner and lived with him in his house for about one year. THEn the respondent went to her parents house for delivery. On 20.11.1990, the respondent gave birth to a male child, but did not return to her matrimonial house. THEn the petitioner went to his inlaws house and requested them to send the respondent to his house, but they refused to send her and after about one year, they themselves brought and dropped her at his house. THEreafter, the respondent was frequently going to her parents house without informing him and she used to demand separate residence and on account of her attitude, his parents allotted a separate portion in their house and he, along with the respondent, was residing separately in that portion. THE respondent again started insisting him to take a separate house near her parents house, but somehow, he adjusted with her in the interest of his family. THE respondent gave birth to a female child on 12.04.1993. THE respondent lodged a false criminal complaint against him on 07.03.1995 and since then, they are residing separately and the respondent has not made any efforts for reconciliation and as there is no other alternative, he is seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of willful desertion and cruelty.

(3.) THE Court below, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the petitioner failed to prove that the respondent treated him with cruelty and further observed that it is the petitioner who had driven away the respondent from his house and due to the conduct of the petitioner, the respondent has been residing in her parents house and, therefore, it cannot be said that the respondent had been residing at her parents house without any reasonable cause and, therefore, the petitioner failed to prove that the respondent deserted him without any reasonable cause or ill-treated him and holding so, the Court below dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by the same, present appeal has been filed.