CH SAMBASIVA RAO Vs. CH VIJAYALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against the order of dismissal in O.P.No. 560 of 1987 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Khammam.

(2.) O.P. No. 560 of 1987 was filed by the husband for divorce under Section 13 (1) (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, on the ground of desertion. It is averred by the petitioner-husband that his marriage took place with the respondent on 16-6-1979 at Vijayawada as per Hindu rites and custom and the same was consummated; that during the wedlock, they were blessed with two daughters; that the petitioner, who was working in Postal Department at Vijayawada, put up his family in his own village i.e., Penamaluru, which is nearer to Vijayawada and there the respondent lived for a period of six months with the petitioner; that thereafter, she left the company of the petitioner without any reasonable cause and excuse and began to live in the house of one Smt. Arvapalli Suseela; that thereafter, the respondent went to her native place Bommaluru and stayed there for a period of one and half years; that due to the repeated persuasion of the petitioner, the respondent again joined the petitioner after one and half years; and that the respondent was advised by the elders to behave properly in view of the welfare of their family. It is further alleged that right from the beginning, the respondent used to behave as per her own whims and fancies to the dislike of the petitioner; that she tried to assert her supremacy and sense of independence and in pursuance of her such predelictions, she always used to pick up quarrels with the petitioner and used to make simple things complicated; and that the on one occasion she had gone to the extent of removing her 'Mangala Sutram' and thrown it on road and went away, without informing the petitioner. It is further alleged that the respondent used to demand the petitioner to resign his job and come over to her village Bommaluru, and that during her stay with the petitioner, she was highly adamant. When the petitioner was transferred from Vijayawada to Khammam in the year 1983, the respondent was brought to Khammam and set up family there, and even in Khammam also, in spite of the repeated advice of the elders to behave properly, she again left the company of the petitioner, after staying there for five or six months at Khammam, without informing him. As the petitioner found it extremely difficult to lead marital life with the respondent any longer, he filed the petition for divorce after having failed in his attempts to get her back by sending mediators, and also after issuing a legal notice to the respondent on 12-10-1987.

(3.) The respondent-wife admitted the marriage and her begetting the two children through the petitioner. She denied all other allegations made in the petition. It is stated that at the time of marriage, an amount of Rs. 30,000/- was paid to the petitioner towards dowry by her parents and in addition, they promised to give three acres of land to him, and that the petitioner since then used to demand the respondent to alienate the said landed property and bring the amount, to which the respondent did not agree, and that, since then the disputes started. It is further alleged that the petitioner mercilessly beat the respondent when he came to attend the ceremonial function of her father saying that he died without selling the landed property, and he created nuisance there. It is further alleged that after reaching Penamaluru from the native place of respondent i.e., Bommaluru, after one week, the mother of the petitioner tried to pour kerosene on the respondent and beat her mercilessly and also tried to administer poison to her insisting her to sign on some blank papers. Even under those circumstances, the respondent continued to live there along with the petitioner. But finally in the year 1986, on one night, the petitioner beat the respondent brutally and forced her to sign on a blank paper and pressed her to give her consent for divorce, for which, the respondent did not agree and under such circumstances, the respondent went away to her parents place and living there. It is further stated that even now, the respondent has no objection to join her husband to lead marital life.