1. This Family Court Appeal is filed against the Order dated 16.09.2011 in O.P.No.766 of 2009, passed by the learned Family Court Judge, Hyderabad.
2. One Gentela Seetha Ram Raju Kiran/respondent filed O.P.No.766 of 2009, against his wife Kudala Swathi (Maiden name)/appellant under Section 13(1)(ia) of Hindu Marriage Act r/w Section 7 of Family Courts Act, to grant decree of divorce by dissolving the marriage between the petitioner and respondent solemnized on 09.08.2006, on the ground of cruelty. The respondent/petitioner examined himself as P.W.1 and also got examined P.W.2 on his behalf and marked Exs.P1 to P5. The appellant/respondent examined herself as R.W.1, but she did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence on her behalf. The trial Court after considering the arguments of both sides granted decree of divorce. Aggrieved by the said Order, respondent therein preferred the present appeal.
3. The parties herein are referred as petitioner-husband and respondent-wife as arrayed in the trial Court for the sake of convenience.
4. The petitioner before the trial Court stated that his marriage was performed with the respondent on 09.08.2006, at Hotel Minerva Grand, Secunderabad as per Hindu rites and customs. He also stated that 50% of the marriage expenditure was borne by the petitioner’s father, apart from presenting her with costly sarees, dress material, gold ornaments etc., The marriage was arranged by the elders and was consummated, resulting the birth of a female child by name Harika, born on 11.08.2007, and now she is under the custody of respondent. At the time of marriage, he has to complete his Law graduation, as he could not settle in practice with income, till then his father promised to give financial assistance to them and it was settled in the presence of elders. At the time of marriage, respondent lost her parents and was in full financial crises, as such both of them are residing in his father’s house at flat No.308, Super Apartments, H.No.3-5-780/11/A, King Koti Road, Hyderabad, but within 15 days respondent insisted him to shift from the parent’s house and abused him and his parents in filthy language. On the advice of his parents, they shifted to flat No.207 of the same apartment. He further stated that respondent was spending thrift, she was busy in shopping and misbehaving with him and she was also not cooking food and not doing other household works. She delivered a female child on 11.08.2007 at Kamineni Genesis Hospital, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. After the delivery she was residing in his father’s house, but she was not cooperating with him for conjugal bliss, even after several weeks of delivery and finally she left him on 29.12.2007, along with the child, gold ornaments, costly items and wearing apparels. The major portion of gold ornaments was presented by his family. He further stated that on 13.01.2007, she insisted him for going to her close relative’s house, when he refused, she abused him in filthy language and damaged the image of their family in front of their relatives. Hence, he filed the petition for divorce.
5. In the Counter filed by the respondent, she denied all the material allegations and stated that entire marriage expenses were borne by her father. He kept an amount of Rs.6,00,000/-for her marriage in the post office. Petitioners have not presented any gold ornaments to her. It was stated to them that petitioner was earning an income of Rs.18,00,000/- p.a. At the time of the marriage, her father was the Bank Manager of ING Vysya Bank Limited. Immediately, after the marriage they resided in the premises of the petitioner’s father. She came to know that petitioner was a habitual drunkard. She used to do her M.B.A and in the month of November, 2007 she got a job in Campus placement in Deloitte, when she was in the 4th semester of M.B.A, but Deloitte asked her to join immediately, as such she used to manage all her household works, college and job. The petitioner’s father wanted the petitioner to go to Court regularly, but he was refused and used to spend time in playing computer games. When she got her salary of Rs.17,000/- in the month of December, 2006, she spent the entire amount for her household articles. Even during the delivery they have not taken any care. She joined in the Genesis hospital, where her sister-in-law work. After the delivery from 5th day onwards, she was made to do all the works and not even allowed to give milk to the baby and she was sleeping after 1 ‘o’ clock in the night. Her mother-in-law and sister-in-law beat her by saying that she was not doing work properly and they were threatening her and necked her out, as such, she left the house voluntarily and her entire belongings are with the petitioner.
6. Petitioner himself examined as P.W.1 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.5 on his behalf and his father was examined as P.W.2. Ex.P1 is the wedding card of the petitioner and respondent, Ex.P2 is the marriage photo, Ex.P3 is the Photostat copy of sale deed, dt.18.08.2006 executed by G.Mahender Reddy in favor of G.Uma Sundari, Ex.P4 is the third party affidavit of the mother of petitioner and Ex.P5 is the reply notice issued by one P.Kiran Kumar. The mother-in-law of the respondent filed the third party affidavit under Ex.P4. The trial Court after considering the entire evidence, granted decree of divorce and dissolved the marriage. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant/wife preferred the present appeal on 23.11.2011, it was admitted and interim suspension was granted on 19.12.2011, but appellant did not take up steps. On 08.11.2023, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant and thus matter was listed under the caption for dismissal on 22.11.2023, but even on that day, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant, as such perused the entire record and reserved for Judgment.
7. Now it is for this Court to see whether the Order of the trial Court is on proper appreciation of facts or not.
8. Both petitioner and respondent made allegations and counter allegations against each other. Respondent stated that she was willing to stay with her husband and also stated that she has not filed any other cases against him as she was interested to stay with him, but the trial Court observed that no steps were taken by both of them after they were separated from each other for their reunion. It was also observed that petitioner stated that respondent did not reveal her whereabouts, as such he got issued legal notice to her brother-in-law. As there is no possibility to both the parties to live together happily, decree of divorce was granted.
9. Now, it is for this Court to see whether the petitioner established the cruelty on the part of the respondent or not. Petitioner himself examined as P.W.1 and also got examined his father as P.W.2. Admittedly, P.W.1 was financially supported by his father P.W.2. Whereas, respondent completed her graduation and got employment and earning Rs.17,000/- per month. Petitioner stated that after the delivery, respondent was staying in the house of parents of the petitioner, but later she deserted him on 29.12.2007, as such he filed the O.P in the year 2009 and it was disposed of in the year 2011, against which respondent preferred this appeal, but she did not evince any interest in pursuing the matter before this Court. Parties are not residing together 2007 to 2023 i.e., for more than 16 years and the marriage between them is irretrievably broken down beyond repair. Therefore, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the order of the trial Court.
10. In the result, the Family Court Appeal is dismissed, confirming the Order of the trial Court dated 16.09.2011 in O.P.No.766 of 2009. There shall be no order as to costs.
11. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
