Smt M Sunitha Rani vs Sri L R Ramesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5152 Kant

                               1



    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                            PRESENT

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

                             AND

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

    MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.7836/2015

BETWEEN:

SMT. M. SUNITHA RANI
W/O SRI. L.R. RAMESH,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT NO.24/21,
VIJAYA NILAYA,
1ST MAIN ROAD,
8TH CROSS ROAD,
DEEPANJALI NAGR,
MYSORE ROAD,
BANGALORE-560026.                         ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI A.DEVARAJA, ADV.)

AND:

SRI L. R. RAMESH
S/O SRI. REDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT LAKSHMIPURA VILLAGE & POST,
NELAVANKI HOBLI,
SRINIVASAPURA TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563126.                   ... RESPONDENT

(RESPONDENT - SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
                                 2



      THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 19(1) OF THE SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT    AND    DECREE      DATED    16.07.2015      PASSED   IN
M.C.NO.1044/2014    ON   THE    FILE   OF   THE   III   ADDITIONAL
PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE
PETITION FILED U/S 27(1)(d) OF THE SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT,
FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.


      THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
VISHWAJITH SHETTY J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                         JUDGMENT

This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed by the wife

challenging the judgment and decree dated 16.07.2015

passed by the III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court,

Bangalore, in M.C.No.1044/2014.

2. Brief facts of the case that would be relevant for the

purpose of disposal of this appeal are:

The marriage of the appellant-wife with the respondent-

husband was solemnized on 24.06.2007 at Sri Dharmasthala

Manjunathaswamy Temple, Dharmasthala as per Hindu rites

and customs and subsequently, the marriage was registered

under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, on 27.06.2007 in the

office of the Sub-Registrar, Bangalore. From the said

wedlock, the couple have a male child by name Vikas who

was born on 01.07.2008.

3. It is the specific case of the appellant that at the

time of marriage, the marriage expenses and the demands

made by the respondent including dowry were met by her

parents. However, after marriage, he was not properly

looking after her and even after the birth of the child, he did

not bother to take care of her and the child and he did not

even show love and affection towards them. She has also

contended that the respondent is an alcoholic and used to

abuse and assault her demanding dowry. She has further

stated that her husband is a vagabond and he used to go

away from the house and return back after several days

without intimating her. She has also stated that he used to

harass her for money for fulfilling his vices. She has stated

that even at the time of naming ceremony of the son, the

husband had created a scene in the house and he had

demanded a sum of Rs.25,000/- for attending the ceremony.

She has also stated that he used to doubt her character and

many a times he had quarreled with her in this regard. She

has stated that she had filed a criminal case against him and

the Police had summoned and warned him and inspite of the

same, he had continued his bad habits. Raising all these

contentions, the appellant had initially filed a divorce petition

in M.C.No.3217/2010 under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955, which was dismissed on 11.12.2012 for

the reason that the marriage was registered under the

Special Marriage Act and therefore, subsequently the

appellant filed M.C.No.1044/2014 under Section 27(1)(d) of

the Special Marriage Act, seeking dissolution of the marriage

solemnized on 24.06.2007.

4. In the said proceedings, the respondent-husband

had remained absent. The appellant had examined herself as

PW.1 and got marked 5 documents as Exs.P1 to P5. The

Family Court vide the impugned judgment and decree had

dismissed the petition filed by the wife and therefore, the

present appeal is filed.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant-wife contends that

the respondent-husband is not at all interested in the

marriage and he has failed to take care of his wife and son.

He submits that the Family Court has failed to appreciate the

material placed by the appellant on record and thereby erred

in dismissing the petition. Accordingly he prays to allow the

appeal.

6. The Appellant, who had examined herself as PW.1

before the Family Court, had reiterated all the averments

made by her in the petition filed by her under Section

27(1)(d) of the Special Marriage Act, seeking the relief of

dissolution of her marriage with the respondent solemnized

on 24.06.2007. She has narrated the various incidents of

cruelty meted out on her and she has also stated that the

husband was a chronic drunkard and was in the habit of

assaulting his wife and son without there being any reason.

She has also stated that the husband was in the habit of

leaving the house without informing her and he never used to

return home for few days. She has further stated that the

husband is a vagabond and does not take care of his wife and

son and on the other hand, he used to ill-treat them. This

piece of evidence placed on record remains uncontroverted.

The husband, who was served with the notice before the

Family Court, remained absent and even before this court, he

has remained absent. Therefore, the contention of the

appellant that her husband is a vagabond and he does not

take care of his wife and son and he is addicted to various

vices, etc., appears to be correct.

7. The Family Court has failed to appreciate the various

incidents of cruelty narrated by the appellant-wife and it has

further failed to appreciate the problems faced by the mother

and son because of the ill-treatment meted out on them and

because of the conduct of the respondent-husband.

8. Under the circumstances, we are of the considered

view that the Family Court was not justified in dismissing the

petition filed by the appellant-wife seeking dissolution of her

marriage with the respondent solemnized on 24.06.2007.

Accordingly the following order:

The judgment and decree dated 16.07.2015 passed by

the III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, in

M.C.No.1044/2014, is set aside, the petition filed by the

appellant-wife under Section 27(1)(d) of the Special Marriage

Act, is allowed and the marriage of the appellant with the

respondent solemnized on 24.06.2007 is dissolved by a

decree of divorce.

In the result, the Miscellaneous First Appeal is allowed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

KNM/-