K SRINIVASA RAO Vs. K PADMAJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these three civil miscellaneous appeals can be disposed of by a common order.

(2.) For proper appreciation of the case and in order to avoid confusion, the parties are referred to as the husband and the wife.

(3.) The husband filed O.P. No.77 of 1998 under Section 13(l)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage while the wife filed O.P. No.163 of 1998 for restitution of conjugal rights. Both the O.Ps. were clubbed together for joint trial. Evidence was recorded in O.P. No.77 of 1998 and the same was treated as evidence in O.P. No.163 of 1998. By a common order dated 21st February 2000, the learned Family Court Judge, Secunderabad allowed O.P. 77 of 1998 filed by the husband for dissolution of marriage and dismissed O.P. 163 of 1998 filed by the wife for restitution of conjugal rights. However, instead of dissolving the marriage the learned Judge granted judicial separation under Section 13-A of the Hindu Marriage Act with a fond hope that there was a likelihood of reunion of the husband and the wife. Aggrieved by the said orders, C.M.A. Nos.737 and 738 of 2000 are filed by the wife, one, to set aside the judgment and decree passed in O.P. No.77 of 1998 and the other to set aside the judgment passed in O.P. No.163 of 1998 and to allow the appeal by granting a decree for restitution of conjugal rights, respectively. While so, C.M.A. No.713 of 2001 was filed by the husband to set aside the judgment and decree passed in O.P. No.77 of 1998 and allow the appeal by granting a decree for dissolution of the marriage.