ALAPATI VENKAYAMMA Vs. ALAPATI KESAVA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the wife, who is the first respondent in HMOP No.57 of 1997, which was filed by the 1st respondent herein, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, seeking dissolution of the marriage between the appellant and the 1st respondent on the ground specified under Section 13(1)(i) and (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the appellant and the 1st respondent was solemnized on 24-6-1983 in the village of the appellant-wife i.e., Harischandrapuram. Their marriage was consummated immediately, and during their wedlock, they were blessed with two daughters and a son. The 1st respondent-husband is an illiterate person and the appellant studied up to Tenth class. The 2nd respondent is the alleged paramour, who is no other than the son of the 1st respondent's elder brother. According to the 1st respondent, the appellant-wife left the matrimonial home in June 1996 and thereafter she filed O.S.No.388 of 1996 on the file of the Additional Sub-Court, Guntur, on her behalf and on behalf of her children for maintenance, and obtained injunction restraining the 1st respondent herein from alienating the suit schedule property. The 1st respondent in his petition also alleged that the appellant subjected him to mental cruelty by insulting him in the company of her brothers and other relations and was also managing the family on the ground that the 1 st respondent was an illiterate and was also lending money by obtaining promissory notes in her name. It is stated that the appellant began to have sexual intercourse with others, especially with the 2nd respondent. On one day, when the 1st respondent found the appellant was not having gold jewellery and when he questioned, she represented that the 2nd respondent took the gold jewellery, and to bring them back she went to the fields. Thereafter, the 1st respondent went to the fields and found the appellant and the 2nd respondent were sitting and talking each other. When he questioned them, the 2nd respondent threatened him at knife point. Thereafter, the appellant-wife came to the house, took the children, and went away to her parents' house, handing over the pronotes in her name. It is further stated that the 1st respondent got opened the box and found two letters in the handwriting of the 2nd respondent written to the appellant and they were got read over by him through his elder brother and confirmed that the appellant was leading adulterous life with the 2nd respondent. Hence, the present petition seeking divorce.

(3.) The appellant-wife, who was the 1st respondent in the O.P., filed her counter denying the allegations made by the husband in the petition. She stated that the 2nd respondent is a son by relation, and so the alleged illegal intimacy between the mother and son is unknown, highly heinous, absurd and it was invented only for the purpose of the present petition. The 1st respondent-husband was guilty of gross negligence to maintain her and her children, and he was alienating the joint family properties without just cause, depriving the shares of the children and therefore, she was constrained to file the suit for partition. From the very beginning, the husband was harassing and subjecting her to cruelty by torturing and beating etc. As she was unable to bear the cruelty, she was constrained to leave the matrimonial house in the interest of her children and take shelter in her parents' house. The attitude of the 1st respondent exposes that he wants to ruin the appellant- wife by setting up a false plea of illegal intimacy and also to ruin the minor children, by alienating the joint family properties, acting detrimental to the interest of the children. The alleged two letters, that were found in the handwriting of the 2nd respondent addressed to her, were concocted, false, and were brought into existence for the purpose of the present petition. Therefore, she prayed for dismissal of the petition filed by her husband.