(1.) The appellant is the wife of the respondent. Their marriage took place way back on 4.11.1981 and they were blessed with three children. The respondent filed O.P.No.15 of 2001 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Srikalahasthi against the appellant for divorce, under Sec.13(1) (ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'). He pleaded that though they lived happily together till 1997, the appellant changed her attitude and behaviour from 1998 onwards and she left the house abruptly and without intimation. He further alleged that the appellant was interested more in extending financial help to the husband of her sister, who filed an Insolvency Petition than to look after her own family. It was also alleged that the appellant insulted the respondent in many ways.
(2.) The appellant filed a counter and opposed the O.P. She denied the allegations made in the O.P. She pleaded that it was the family of the respondent that insisted on the marriage of the respondent with the appellant and thereafter they have been making demands for dowry, though at the time of marriage it was stated that no dowry would be demanded. She further stated that a house, which was given to her by her father, was sold on account of financial difficulties and the respondent cannot have any objection for it.
(3.) Sri V. Sudakar Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant submits that even according to the respondent the alleged desertion on the part of the appellant was on 01.05.2000 and whereas the O.P. was filed on 20.06.2001 i.e., less than two years from the date of the alleged desertion. He submits that the learned trial Judge has imported his personal likes, dislikes and attitude into the case and granted the decree though the grounds of desertion and cruelty were not at all proved.