R SUNIFHA Vs. R SURESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the Order dated 19-12-1994 in O.P. No.58 of 1992 on the file of the learned III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad allowing the petition of the husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act granting a decree for restitution of conjuga1 rights against the wife.

(2.) Few facts, which are necessary for disposal of the case, are that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 11-6-1987 in Arya Samaj Mandir, Seethaphalmandi, Secunderabad as per Hindu rites and it was consummated on the same day. The parties belong to different communities, namely, the appellant belongs to Brahmin community, whereas the respondent belongs to Naidu community. After living for some time in a rented house near Housing Board Colony, Moula All, where both of them were happy for about 6 months, they shifted themselves to his parents' house. In the interregnum, the appellant, who was already studying B.Com. 1st year, completed her graduation at the instance of the respondent. She has also appeared for Hindi examination and completed English Typewriting and got herself qualified in the typewriting examination. A male child was born on 5-12-1988 out of their lawful wedlock and thereafter their marriage was on rocks. The case of the respondent was that without any lawful excuse, the appellant has kept hersel f away from his company and she is now residing in her parents house, wherea s the case of the appellant is that the respondent has meted-out cruel treatment towards her on some flimsy pretext or other, that he was suspecting her fidelity even on seeing her talking with elders and that her life became miserable and therefore, she was forced to go to her parents house and take shelter there. It is also her case that she filed M.C. No.37 of 1992 in the Court of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad under Section 125 Cr.P.C. along with her child and the child was granted maintenance at Rs.250/- per month. She, therefore, resisted the above petition on the ground of cruelty and stated that there is every justification for her to live separately.

(3.) The parties went to trial on the above pleadings and the respondent herein examined himself as P.W.I and one A.P. Seshagiri Rao as P.W.2, while the appellant examined herself as R.W.1. Legal notices were exchanged and they are marked as Exs. A-1 to A-3 on behalf of the respondent. On a consideration of the above oral and documentary evidence, the learned III Additional Judge, came to the conclusion that the appellant could not establish that she was entitled to stay away from the respondent and hence, the petition was allowed and decree for restitution of conjugal rights has been granted. Aggrieved by the said order and decree, this appeal is filed.