POPURI SUNITA LAKSHMI Vs. POPPURI SRINIVAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem dated 29-7-2000 made in O.P. No. 122 of 1996 allowing the O.P.

(2.) The appellant herein is the wife. The respondent filed the above O.P. under Section 13(l)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, the Act) for dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent took place on 15-12-1991 and thereafter they lived together at Kothagudem and out of the said wed lock they were pleased with a daughter. It is stated that thereafter the appellant started quarrelling with him to put up a separate residence. It is stated that the appellant used to leave the house without informing him and he used to bring her back from her parents' house. The respondent further stated that as he refused to set up a separate residence, the appellant developed ill-will and started quarrelling with his parents and used to scold them in foul and filthy language. The respondent further stated that she was also adamant and on several occasions she removed her 'mangalasutram' and threw it on his face stating that he is importent. It is also stated by the respondent that she even threatened him to commit suicide if he does not put up a separate famiiy

(3.) The respondent further stated that on the advise of the elders, he put up a separate residence in May 1993 and began to live with the appellant. According to him, the appellant began to spend money lavishly affecting his economic position and whenever he tried to advise her to change her behaviour, she used to scold in foul and filthy language. He further stated that in July 1993 she raised a dispute with him by raising hue and cry and caused disrepute to him. She left the matrimonial house with her belongings, when he was in the office and in spite of his best efforts to bring her back, she refused to join him. According to him, thereafter he issued a notice dated 28-11-1993 to her which was returned unserved. According to him, thereafter she filed M.C. No. 100 of 1993 for maintenance. According to the respondent, all the above acts of the appellant constitute 'cruelty' within the meaning of that term in Section 13(l)(ia) of the Act and as the appellant left his comply without any reasonable cause he is constrained to file the above O.P. for divorce.