U N SATYANARAYANA Vs. U SHARADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the husband against the decree of divorce and custody of the minor child granted in favour of the wife by the Family Court, Hyderabad in OP No.289 of 2000 filed by the respondents herein under Section 13(l)(ia) and (iii) and 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act).

(2.) The facts leading to the decree of divorce and custody of the child are briefly as follows: The parties are hereinafter referred as arrayed in the original petition. Petitioner No.1 (wife) was married to the respondent (husband) on 29-6-1986. The marriage was solemnized at Hyderabad according to Hindu rites and customs. The respondent is an Engineering Graduate. The 2nd petitioner- son was bora to them during the wedlock. Since the date of marriage, the respondent was exhibiting peculiar behaviour. His mind always flickered. At the time of marriage also he was administered anti-depression drug-Lithium. According to his father the respondent was mentally disturbed from 1983 i.e., since his college days and has been continuously under medication. He could not concentrate on any work due to imbalance and negative thinking. He used to shout and beat the 1 st petitioner by abusing her in filthy language under the depression. He did not choose to work to eke-out his livelihood and completely depended on his father. Whenever the respondent stopped taking medicines, his behaviour turned abnormal and was becoming lunatic torturing the 1 st petitioner. He used to suddenly raise from his bed and started shouting in the midnight threatening the 1st petitioner and throttled her by uttering '1 would like to beat you 15 times', 'I would like to kill you', '1 would like to cut you into pieces' and so on. He used to create these kinds of scenes regularly. The 1st petitioner had to go to her parents' house to escape from the respondent, but her father-in-law used to convince her and take back to marital home. Out of 14 years of marital life, she spent about 6 years in her parents' house. The parents of the respondent being unable to bear with his extraordinary, cruel and psychotic behaviour left to Varasnasi (Kasi) in February, 1998. The respondent suspected the character of the 1st petitioner at every moment and torturned her regularly. The 1 st petitioner along with the 2nd petitioner left the house of the respondent and reached her parents house. Despite that, on 17-2-2000, the respondent came to her parents' house, beat her and dragged her to take to his house. She made a complaint to the police, Women Protection Cell, on 18-2-2000, but at the instance of the parents- in-law and the family members, compelled to withdraw the same. Every day she is receiving threatening phone calls from the respondent. The fourteen years of bitter experience made the 1st petitioner to realize that there is no possibility of the respondent recovering from lunacy and she is apprehending threat to her life, if she is taken by the respondent. The respondent is also spoiling the career of the 2nd petitioner by not allowing him to study. Hence, the petition for dissolution of marriage between the 1st petitioner and the respondent and to declare the custody of the 2nd petitioner with the 1st petitioner by allowing the petition with costs.

(3.) A counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent and the following are the contents in brief: The 1st petitioner left to her parents' house on 31-12-1998 along with the 2nd petitioner. The petitioner either on account of her mental infirmity or with the advise of the relations developed an attitude of enmity against the respondent and deserted him. Without caring for the welfare of the 2nd petitioner, the 1st petitioner abruptly decided to get the marriage dissolved. The respondent is not agreeable for the dissolution of the marriage since it is likely to affect the career of the 2nd petitioner. The petition is, therefore, liable to be dismissed.