Sri.B.S.Ravi Shankar vs Smt. Leelavathi
2023 Latest Caselaw 1992 Kant

                          -1-
                                    MFA No.8150 of 2016




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
       DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2023
                       PRESENT
        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                         AND
  THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8150 OF 2016 (FC)

BETWEEN:

SRI B.S.RAVI SHANKAR
S/O SRI B.M.SHANKARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/AT NO.192, NEAR VENUGOPALA SWAMY TEMPLE,
1ST CROSS, BAGALAGUNTE,
HESARAGHATTA MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE-0560073.
                                           ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI BYREGOWDA N., ADV.)

AND:

SMT. LEELAVATHI
D/O JAYARAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT KSRTC LAYOUT,
NO.25, IST A CROSS
HEROHALLI
BENGALURU-560091.
                                         ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MOHAMMED SHERIFF, ADV.)

       THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF THE
FAMILY COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 06.10.2016 PASSED IN MC NO.3502/2012 ON THE FILE
OF THE IV ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT,
                                     -2-
                                                   MFA No.8150 of 2016




BENGALURU DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED U/SEC.13(1)
(ia) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, FOR DISSOLLUTION OF
MARRIAGE.


      THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
21.03.2023,    COMING        ON       FOR     PRONOUNCEMENT        OF
JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL J., DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:

                            JUDGMENT

This appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts

Act, 1984, has been filed against the judgment and decree

dated 06.10.2016 passed in M.C.No.3502/2012 by the IV

Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, by

which the petition filed by the appellant seeking

dissolution of marriage, was dismissed.

2. Brief facts giving rise to filing of this appeal are that

the marriage of the appellant and respondent was

solemnized on 16.03.2011 as per Hindu rites and customs

at Pooja Sri Convention Hall, Kamakshipalya, Bangalore.

3. It is pleaded that respondent suffers from superiority

complex as she was a graduate, and the appellant was a

MFA No.8150 of 2016

matriculate. It is averred that the respondent used to

condemn, ridicule and humiliate the appellant in various

fashions. During the initial days it was within the four

walls, subsequently the respondent started harassing in

front of others and disrespected to appellant everyday. It

is further pleaded that respondent used to involve his

married sister, while harassing the appellant.

4. It is averred that respondent used to call the

appellant as a womanizer, drunkard and she did not

respect the appellant's parents. It is also pleaded that

respondent used to suspect the character of appellant, and

also demanded for partition of family property. The

respondent was in the habit of creating a scene by going

out of the house shouting, attracting people and she used

to falsely state that there is demand of dowry.

5. It is further averred that respondent left matrimonial

home in the second week of February 2012, hence the

appellant filed police complaint and with the intervention

of the well wishers she re-joined the matrimonial home. It

MFA No.8150 of 2016

is also averred that she underwent major surgery without

disclosing to the appellant and on 31.08.2012, the

respondent picked up quarrel and lodged false complaint

against the appellant and his family members, hence the

police had forcibly detained the appellant, which has

caused mental cruelty to the appellant.

6. The respondent filed statement of objections wherein

she has admitted the factum of marriage, however, she

has specifically denied the allegations of cruelty. It is

pleaded that she has taken care of the entire family and

never disrespected them and it is the appellant's brother,

who used to abuse her without any reason and never

allowed her to visit her parents house. It is further pleaded

that appellant's family members have treated the

respondent inhumanely, by not providing proper food and

clothing. The appellant's family have also demanded dowry

from the father of the respondent. It also pleaded that in

second week of February 2012 the respondent was not

keeping well and the mother of the appellant forced her to

wash clothes and when she expressed her inability, the

MFA No.8150 of 2016

mother of the appellant had called wife's parents and

abused them in filthy language. It is averred that on

05.03.2012 a panchayat was held and she went back to

the matrimonial home, however, the appellant and his

family members have assaulted her and she became

unconscious and thereafter took treatment in Ashraya

hospital. It is further averred that the respondent was

suffering from stomach pain, hence she was required to

undergo surgery and thereafter she joined the matrimonial

home. The appellant and his family members compelled

the respondent to do hard work and did not allow her to

take rest. They insisted and pressurized the respondent to

sign divorce papers. She could not resist, hence she

shouted for help and immediately a Hoysala Jeep on

patrolling came and took the respondent to the Police

station. The appellant has given statement that he would

take care of the respondent. However the appellant has

not stopped harassing the respondent, thus she has left

the matrimonial house.

MFA No.8150 of 2016

7. The Family Court recorded evidence of the

parties. The appellant examined himself as PW.1

and another witness as PW.2 and produced Exs.P1 to

P7. The respondent examined herself as RW.1 and

produced Exs.R1 and R2. The Family Court inter alia held

that appellant has failed to prove the ground of cruelty.

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed. In the aforesaid

factual matrix the present appeal has been filed.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there

is no dispute with regard to relationship between the

parties. It is submitted that respondent was having

superiority complex, never used to respect the appellant

and his family members and she had a habit of quarrelling

with the appellant. It is further submitted that on

05.03.2012 the appellant had lodged the complaint

against the respondent as she was demanding partition in

the properties. It is also submitted that respondent has

lodged the complaint against the appellant and police have

detained the appellant, which has caused humiliation and

cruelty. These aspects have not been properly

MFA No.8150 of 2016

appreciated by the Family Court, which has resulted in

dismissal of the petition. It is submitted that the parties

are residing separately.

9. We have considered the submission made by the

learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the

records. The respondent has entered appearance through

the learned counsel, however he remained absent.

10. The appellant has averred that respondent was

suffering from superiority complex as she is a graduate,

she used to disrespect the appellant and his family

members and also that she was suffering from ailments

prior to the marriage and the same was not disclosed to

the appellant. She used to quarrel by suspecting his

character and alleging that he is drunkard. The appellant

has examined himself as PW1 and on careful scrutiny of

his deposition, it is evident that the same is reiteration of

the petition averments. The aforesaid allegations are

denied by the respondent in her evidence. There are no

specific instances of humiliation, quarrel or using abusive

MFA No.8150 of 2016

language against the appellant in the pleading, nor stated

in the evidence. The evidence of PW1 is self serving

testimony and no independent witness or family members

have been examined to substantiate the aforesaid

assertions of cruelty.

11. The Family Court has rightly disbelieved the evidence

of PW1 and we do not find any error in the said

finding. The appellant has asserted that respondent was

suffering from various ailments, the same is not

substantiated by producing medical report of the

doctor. The appellant has further alleged that respondent

was demanding for partition of the joint family property,

hence he had filed police complaint, Ex.P4 stating that he

was assaulted by the respondent's family members. On

the contrary, respondent filed police complaint at Ex.P5

stating that she was harassed and assaulted by the

appellant and his family members. On careful examination

of oral testimony of PW.1 and Ex.P4, it is not evident that

respondent has caused cruelty on the appellant. On

further examination of evidence of RW.1, it is evident that

MFA No.8150 of 2016

it is the appellant, who had assaulted the respondent and

she was treated at Ashraya Medinova Private Limited. On

perusal of evidence of PW.2 he admits that he has

deposed before the Family Court the information given by

the appellant and he has no personal knowledge about the

quarrel and behaviour of the respondent. The Family

Court has rightly held that PW2 is not helpful for the

present case.

12. The alleged grounds of cruelty pleaded before the

Family Court are vague and neither any specific instances

of cruelty have been pleaded nor the same have been

substantiated by cogent and corroborative

evidence. Therefore the appellant has failed to prove the

grounds of cruelty.

13. The Family Court has recorded a finding that

appellant has failed to prove the ground for dissolution of

marriage i.e, cruelty. These findings do not suffer from

any infirmity warranting interference by this Court in the

present appeal.

- 10 -

MFA No.8150 of 2016

14. For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find any

merit in this appeal. The same fails and is hereby

dismissed.

No order as to costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

NG CT: DMN