BATHULA IYLAIAH Vs. BATHULA DEVAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the husband is directed .against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Warangal, in O.P. No. 13 of 1676 allowing the petition and granting decree for divorce.

(2.) It is alleged in the petition filed by the wife, the respondent herein, that she was married to the appellant about, ten years ago at the house of her parents in Lingapur village of Narsampet taluk. At the time of the marriage she was aged about nine years while her husband was aged about thirteen years. Subsequent to the marriage, she occasionally lived in the house of the appellant for short periods. For the purpose of disposal of this appeal, it is not necessary for us to refer to the other facts except to state that she was not being treated well by the appellant and his family members, that the appellant deserted the respondent, that the attempts made by the parents of the respondent for reconciliation failed and that the respondent apprehended that it would be harmful and injurious for her to live with the appellant. Subsequent to the filing of the original petition, the respondent-wife filed and amended petition on 1-2-1977 in para 6 of which it was stated as under:

(3.) The appellant-husband filed a counter resisting the petition on the grounds that their ages were wrongly mentioned in the petition. According to him, the age of the respondent-wife was twenty two while his age was twenty eight years. Their marriage was solemnized on 5-1-1971 and at that time the respondent was seventeen years old while he was twenty three years old. She was never ill-treated. But the parents of the respondent are mischievously trying to separate them. The marriage was performed at their proper age. It was further stated by him that as per the advice of the elders he sent the respondent to her parents house for Ugadi festival on condition that she would be sent back after the festival but her parents did not send her back. On the other hand they tried to re-marry her illegally to one Induri Mallaiah. In the additional counter filed by the appellant after the amended petition was filed, it was stated that the marriage tie between them was not repudiated and that when the parents of respondent and the respondent came to know that there was no hope to succeed the case they got amended the original petition and prayed for divorce in the alternative.