CHIRANJEEVI Vs. LAVANYA ALIAS SUJATHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order dated 19th October, 1995 passed by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Saroornagar, Hyderabad in O.P. No. 104 of 1992, where by the learned Subordinate Judge dismissed the petition filed by the appellant-husband under Section 13 (1 ) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

(2.) The marriage between the appellant and respondent was solemnized on 1-8-1990 at Lalaguda, Secunderabad as per Hindu rites and customs. After the marriage they started living together at Goutamnagar, Malkajgiri. Differences arose between them within three months of their living together. It is the case of the appellant-husband that the respondent-wife used to visit her parents house without informing him or any one of the members in the joint family. On several occasions, according to the appellant husband, he warned her not to leave the house frequently, but she never cared his words. One K. Narayana, a retired Police Officer working as Special Judicial Second Class Magistrate, ill-advised the respondent wife and thereby respondent-wife became more and more adamant and behaved rashly and she even did not care the appellant husband. The respondent-wife was under the influence of her maternal uncles and more particularly K. Narayana, a retired Police Officer. The appellant-husband took a separate residence on rent for comfortable living of the respondent-wife. Even then the respondent-wife did not change her mind and she continued to leave the matrimonial home and stay with her parents. There by the appellant-husband was deprived of her conjugal association. It is the case of the appellant-husband that the respondent-wife deserted him on her own accord on 23-11 -1990 and she carried her all belongings including jewellery, cash and other costly sarees. Since then the respondent-wife has been residing in her parental home. The appellant-husband made several efforts to bring her back to matrimonial home, which proved to be futile. According to the appellant husband, K. Narayana, a retired Police Officer, came along with K. Vishwanadham and other anti-social elements and tried to manhandle him at N.G.R.I, office. On 12-5-1991 at about 11-00 a.m. the maternal uncles of the respondent-wife, namely, Anand, Ramarao and Viswanatham; and a rowdy sheeter by name George of Thukaram gate came to his house with deadly weapons threatened him and his father and abused them in filthy and un-parliamentary language. The appellant-husband reported the matter to the Station House Officer, Malkajgiri, Police Station, but the police being hand in glove with the said Narayana, did not take any action. The acts and threats of the maternal uncles of the respondent-wife at her instance caused mental agony to him. A month there after, the respondent-wife gave a legal notice dated 20-6-1991 directing the appellant-husband to take her for conjugal association. The appellant-husband issued a reply notice dated 8-7-1991. It is the further case of the appellant-husband that the respondent-wife had instigated the press people and got published a news item in Telugu newspaper "Udayam", dated 23-7-1991 making all false accusations. The respondent-wife also lodged a report with the S.H.O. Malkajgiri P.S. and there upon a case in Crime No.199 of 1991 under Section 498-A I.P.C. came to be registered against the appellant-husband and the members of his family. The conduct of the respondent-wife caused mental agony and there by the appellant-husband chose to file O.P. No. 104 of 1992 under Sec. 13 (1 ) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty.

(3.) Respondent-wife filed written statement denying the allegations made against her. It is the case of the respondent-wife that the appellant-husband misrepresented to her parents as if he was a scientist in office of Survey of India and thereby made them to part with a substantial amount towards marriage expenses and purchase of various articles such as Kinetic Honda Scooter, Refrigerator, Jewelleries, marriage suits etc. It is further stated in the written statement that the appellant-husband moved the Court with the object of going for second marriage and to quench his thirst of more dowry. It is also the case of the respondent-wife that she was subjected to harassment and was also confined in a room for more than three days under the pretext of appellant-husband was going on official camp. On enquiry the respondent-wife came to know that the appellant-husband was only a stenographer and he was in the habit of taking drinks and gambling by spending money lavishly. The appellant-husband used to force her to bring more money on one pretext or the other to meet the expenses of his vices. When the appellant-husband deserted her and her child, she moved M.C. No.33 of 1991 in the Court of X Metropolitan Magistrate for maintenance to self and her child. She is always ready and willing to join with the appellant-husband for conjugal association. Hence, she sought for dismissal of the O.P.