JAMI SADHU AMMA Vs. JAMI SATYANARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a wife's appeal directed against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam dismissing her petition for restitution of conjugal rights. The averments in the said petition disclose that the appellant was married to the respondent according to Hindu Law and the custom of their community.

(2.) They also begot a daughter, who is two years old. It was alleged that the respondent, who is the husband, developed dislike for the appellant and started ill-treating her. In 1962 the appellant went to her parents' house for the festival of Sankranci. After that, the respondent neglected to bring her back. Subsequently there was a mediation by elders and the husband was prevailed upon to receive her in or about April, 1963. Since she joined him, he was attempting to find ways and means for driving her away from the house with a view to enable him to marry his sister's daughter. Therefore, he continued his ill-treatment towards his wife. One day he took her almost by force and against her will to S. Kota, but at the intervention of her mother and other elders, who happened to come on the spot, he took her back to his house. On 24th June, 1963 he with the help of one T. Atchanna; obtained from her by deceit and misrepresentation, her thumb-impression on two blank sheets of white paper under the pretext of requiring them in connection with a criminal case. Thereafter all of a sudden he drove her out of his house keeping behind with him their daughter. Since then he refused to receive and maintain the appellant at his house. Since then he has also been proclaiming that the appellant had executed a deed of divorce in his favour on 25th May, 1963 and that she is no longer his wife by reason of her alleged illicit intimacy with one Jami Appalanaidu in the village. She has alleged that it is false that she had any illicit intimacy with any one, much less Jami Appalanaidu and that it is equally false that she executed a deed of divorce dissolving the marital ties between her and the respondent.

(3.) A counter was filed by the respondent alleging that it is not true that he drove his wife out of his house. She left the house of her own free will. It was further alleged that she has been in illicit intimacy with Jami Appalanaidu for over six months, earlier to 25th May, 1963, and she was caught red-handed while in his company in the thatched shed of one Thurpati Appalanaidu (sic) in the village in broad day light. At that time, Jami Appalanaidu attempted to kill him and a crime report was given in the matter. Subsequently she has been living with Appalanaidu, and in the presence of respectable witnesses she executed a deed of divorce in his favour on 25th May, 1963 according to the caste custom and obtained a similar document as a counter-part from him. It was denied that her thumb-impressions were obtained by deceit or misrepresentation on any paper.