AHSAN HYDARI Vs. VIDYA HYDARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the appellant who is the respondent-husband in O. P. No. 308/82. The present respondent Mrs. Vidya Hydari filed an application for granting a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage between the parties which took place on 14-6-1975. The marriage was solemnised under the Special Marriage Act and the present petition is filed under Section 27 of that Act. The trial court came to the conclusion that the petitioner has made out a case that she was subjected to ill-treatment both mental and physical and that husband is guilty of neglecting the family by not providing adequate funds for maintenance of the household and thus neglected her which resulted in her walking out of the marital home. In short the court found cruelty mental and physical was established and hence a decree for divorce should be granted. The court also observed that on a careful analysis of the evidence problems arose between the parties even before the marriage, as the marriage got postponed by 30 months and subsequent to the marriage the problems got aggravated as their marital life was not happy. The court came to the conclusion that the parties who are highly educated and sophisticated have chosen wrong partners of life and that there is no possibility of their living together any longer as there is total tempermental incompatibility and that there is irretrievable break down of the marriage.

(2.) In this appeal Sri K. Ramagopal, appearing for the appellant-husbandcontends that the wife appears to be the hyper sensitive neurotic type and perhaps her family background contributed for her becoming a psychopathic case. Simple and trivial matters which should normally be adjusted between the spouses have been exaggerated and things had gone from bad to worse. The parties to the marriage come from highly cultured and well educated sophisticated families. The husband is the grand-son of a former Prime Minister of Hyderabad, and an Engineer. The wife had a brilliant academic record and she is the step-daughter of Raja Rameswararao, Raja of Wanaparthy. It is unfortunate that these two highly educated and cultured people were unable to make a success of their marriage though their marriage is a love marriage. On behalf of both the parties it was submitted that from 12-8-80 the parties have been living separately and there is no possibility of their coming together, in fact in 1982 at one stage the parties contemplated divorce by mutual consent. But at the last stage the husband resiled and ultimately this Original Petition was filed in the year 1982.

(3.) Mr. Ramagopal contends that though he has no objection for thecourt granting a decree of divorce because there is no possibility of the parties living together, he has every objection for the various findings recorded by the learned Judge to the effect that the husband is a drunkard and that he was guilty of inflicting mental and physical cruelty to the wife and that he was neglecting the family. He contends that in this marriage it is the husband who is the victim of cruelty. The wife never cooperated for a happy married life and she never performed her conjugal obligations. She appears to be averse to sexual life due to some physiological defect and tempermental attitude. Mr. Ramgopal contended that the trial Judge did not draw proper inferences from the material placed before him and several of the findings recorded by the Judge have to be vacated.