Telangana High Court
M V Ranga Chary vs G Sandhya Rani on 7 June, 2024
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K.Lakshman, P.Sree Sudha
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
AND
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
FAMILY COURT APPEAL No.390 of 2013
JUDGMENT:
(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman)
Heard Sri O.Ramesh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri
Ch.Ravindra Babu, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the Order and decree dated
04.05.2012 in O.P.No.1608 of 2008, passed by the Family Court, Ranga
Reddy District, appellant preferred the present appeal.
3. He has filed the aforesaid O.P. under Section 13(1)(ia) of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the respondent seeking dissolution of
marriage contending as follows:
I. His marriage with the respondent was performed on
21.02.1997 at Tenali, Guntur District as per Hindu Customs
and Rites. It is an arranged marriage. They stayed together
from February, 1997 to July, 1997 at Alwal, Hyderabad i.e.,
in the residence of the parents of the respondent/wife.
II. In the Month of July, 1998, both the parties left to U.S.A.
and both of them had lived together in U.S.A. till
December, 1998. During the said period, the respondent
conceived and miscarried twice and the doctors in U.S.A.
informed that health wise, she is very weak and it is very
difficult for her to deliver a baby. Therefore, the doctors
suggested the appellant/husband to shift the respondent
from U.S.A., as the weather is not suiting her body.
Thereafter, both the parties have returned to India in
December, 1998. From March, 1998 to August, 1999, both
the parties lived at the residence of respondent's parents.
III. Subsequently, the respondent/wife conceived and was taken
to their family doctor, wherein all the tests were conducted.
The doctor advised the respondent/wife to take complete
bed rest till the delivery and also advised her not to travel.
Thus, she was under full bed rest at her parents' house. At
the time of delivery, the doctor has advised the respondent
to go for caesarean, as her health condition is not permitting
for normal delivery. They have accepted the doctor's
advice. The respondent was blessed with a son on
08.03.2000 and she underwent caesarean operation.
IV. The appellant had stayed with the respondent from January,
2000 to September, 2001. During the said stay, the
respondent and her parents insulted him and they have not
even offered him a seat. From the 10th day of the marriage,
the respondent and her parents started insulting him. They
have pressurized the appellant to shift to Chennai and settle
down there by breaking his relations with his parents and
family members. They have also put a condition that he can
visit his parents and relatives once in two (02) weeks.
V. The appellant had bluntly refused the same. The mother of
the respondent/wife used to criticize his nature and behavior
in addition to blaming his mother for such brought up. The
respondent's parents had supported her. It became ongoing
process. Thus, the appellant had undergone mental
harassment from the respondent and her family members.
She also scolded him saying that she hates to see him
talking with his brother and insisted him to stop talking to
his brother. Whenever his parents offered any help like
providing groceries to their daughter, she never used to
tolerate the same. Thus, respondent used to quarrel with the
appellant and his parents on petty issues. Out of eleven (11)
years of their marital life, the respondent/wife worked for
three (03) years as a teacher in Government School. The
appellant did not take even a single penny from her salary.
VI. After the delivery, the doctors advised her to stay in India
only on the ground that the respondent and her son are very
weak and they need proper homely care. She was also
suffering from high Blood Pressure and Heart problems etc.
In July 2002, the appellant had joined the respondent in
India for one (01) month. After marriage, the appellant
came to know that the respondent is 2 years older than what
they have informed them before marriage. The Horoscope
given by the respondent was also wrong. According to the
customs of the Hindus, no one will proceed to marriage
without matching of the Horoscope. The respondent and her
parents cheated the appellant and harmed the sentiments of
the appellant and their family.
VII. On questioning the same, they started arguing adamantly. In
July 2002, the appellant stayed about one (01) month in
India and subsequently, the respondent with the support of
her sister and her sister's husband, who are staying in
U.S.A. at that time applied for dependent VISA for herself
and her son without the knowledge of the appellant, by
giving wrong representation that her husband is working in
a private company and staying in India and whereas, the
actual fact was that the appellant was working and staying
in U.S.A. at that particular point of time. Thus,
subsequently, the respondent and her son were granted with
VISA for ten (10) years. They went to U.S.A. to her sister's
house in September 2003 without even informing the
appellant. They have obtained VISA by furnishing wrong
information.
VIII. Therefore, the appellant has cancelled his idea of applying
for Green Card. In order to avoid further using of passports
by respondent and her son, the appellant had surrendered
their passports. Thereafter, the respondent had also
attempted to implicate the appellant and his father in false
cases. The appellant visited India in February and
November, 2004. From February, 2004 onwards, both the
parties were living separately in different rooms without
having any conjugal relationship.
IX. In November 2005, the appellant's father expired due to
cancer and therefore he came to attend funeral. On the
funeral day, the parents of the respondent visited the
appellant's house. There also, he was insulted. The
appellant requested his brothers-in-law to counsel her.
There was no response from them.
X. At the time of 1st death anniversary of his father in
November 2006, the respondent and her parents came to his
house. Her father asked the appellant in a disrespectful tone
as to why he had not made calls to the respondent/wife and
her son. Thus, the respondent tortured the appellant
mentally for years together. He didn't have proper sleep and
she even used to woke him up in the midnights and create
nuisance. When the appellant warned her to stop all these
things, she used to hit her head to the wall and she also used
to hold the appellant's collar. She used to press the throat of
the appellant and assault him.
XI. Thus, the respondent subjected him to cruelty. The appellant
came to India in November 2008. Even then, the
respondent/wife pretended the appellant that he is not
interested to lead life with her and she decided to leave him
and go permanently to her parent's house in Bangalore. The
parents left to U.S.A. in January 2008 to stay along with
their son. Before leaving India, they did not have the
courtesy to inform the appellant's parents. They stayed in
U.S.A. only and at least for courtesy sake, they had not even
called the appellant even once over phone. Thus, the
appellant was subjected him to cruelty.
3. The respondent filed counter denying the aforesaid allegations
made by the appellant. She never subjected the appellant to cruelty and
in fact he only subjected the respondent to cruelty. Even after the birth of
child on 08.03.2000, he came to take them to U.S.A. His parents gave
evasive answers. She never misrepresented any authority including U.S.
Embassy. He is always in the influence of his brother who was involved
in a C.B.I. Case for defrauding his employer i.e., Canara Bank,
Begumpet Branch to a tune of Rs.1.5 Crores by forging signatures, etc. It
is the Second brother, Mr.Venugopala Chary who started spoiling the
life of the appellant and respondent. They harassed the appellant both
physically and mentally. Due to the same, she went into depression and
her health was deteriorated. She used to get headaches many times.
Thus, they necked her out on 01.03.2009 at 08.00 p.m. without even
allowing her to wear the apparel. On instigation of the mother and
brother of the appellant, the respondent and her child came out of the
matrimonial house. Therefore, she was compelled to file a petition and
serve a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. She was compelled to file
an application vide D.V.C.No.7 of 2009.
4. To prove the said ground of cruelty, appellant examined himself
as PW.1, and her sister-in-law as PW.2. He has filed Exs.P1 to P15
documents. To disprove the said cruelty, the respondent had examined
herself as RW.1 and her father as RW.2.
5. On consideration of the entire evidence, learned Family Court had
dismissed the said O.P., holding that the appellant herein failed to prove
the cruelty.
6. As discussed supra and also perusal of the record including the
evidence would reveal that the marriage of the appellant with the
respondent was performed on 21.02.1997 and it is an arranged marriage.
They have lead a happy marital life by staying at the respondent's
parents house situated at Tirumalghery, Hyderabad. They left to U.S.A.
in July 1998. There, the respondent got conceived and miscarriaged
twice. The doctors advised the respondent/wife that she is very weak and
very difficult to her to deliver a baby in U.S.A atmosphere. Therefore,
the doctors advised the appellant to shift her to India. Therefore they
came back to India. There, she gave birth to a son on 08.03.2000 by
undergoing caesarean operation. The doctors advised the respondent to
take complete bed rest. They also advised the respondent and her son to
stay in India since they need a proper homely care. It appears that the
said fact precipitated the issue between the appellant and the respondent.
7. The appellant contended that respondent and her parents have
misrepresented with regard to her date of birth and horoscope. But he
failed to prove the same. The marriage of both the parties was performed
on 21.02.1997 and he has filed the present O.P. on 05.12.2008.
Therefore, he cannot contend that the respondent and her parents
misrepresented with regard to her date of birth and horoscope. After a
lapse of 11 years that too, after giving birth to a child. However, he
failed to prove the said aspect. The appellant failed to prove that the
respondent and her son tried to obtain VISA by misrepresenting the U.S.
authorities saying that her husband is working in a private company and
is staying in Hyderabad. In fact he had filed Ex.P.6 (medical
prescriptions), Ex.P.7 (application for issue of T.C.), Ex.P.8 (T.C. from
Model school) and Ex.P.9 (Application for admission into Nagarjuna
High School, S.R.Nagar). Therefore, he cannot contend that the
respondent tried to obtain VISA by misrepresenting the facts. However,
he failed to prove the said aspects.
8. The appellant also made another allegation that the respondent and
her parents pretended him by saying that they have high level political
influence and they will implicate the appellant and his family members
in false cases. The appellant failed to prove the said aspect by producing
any evidence. The appellant also failed to prove that the respondent and
her parents insisted him to settle down in Madras, by leaving his parents
and family members. Of course, the said issue is a trivial issue which can
be sorted out and is not a ground for granting divorce. It does not
amounts to cruelty. Even the allegation made by the appellant that the
respondent/wife insisted him to take separate house and subjected him to
stay separately from his parents is also not a cruel act. The appellant can
as well convince his wife instead of making bald allegations against her.
9. In Paragraph No.12 of the petition, he has made a serious
allegation that the respondent used to wake up at midnights and used to
disturb him. But he had failed to lodge any complaint on the same and
failed to prove the said aspect to the elders and well wishers including
his parents and her parents. He has to prove the said aspect by producing
proper evidence.
10. As discussed supra, though the appellant contended that he was
subjected to cruelty, he has not mentioned the said cruel acts specifically
and failed to prove the same by producing cogent evidence.
11. As discussed supra, to prove the said cruelty, the appellant
examined himself as PW.1 and his sister-in-law as PW.2 and during the
cross-examination, he categorically admitted that the respondent worked
as a teacher for three (03) years five (05) months approximately and for
the balance period, she stayed with them. The respondent never
quarreled with them. PW.2 was not present at all time when the appellant
and the respondent are together or are speaking to each other. After four
to five years of the marriage, the respondent used to discuss with her
husband regarding the setting up of separate residence. PW.2 never
advised the respondent, not to demand the appellant to live separately.
She cannot say as to whom the respondent quarreled besides the
appellant. She has further admitted that the appellant never has a habit of
sharing his personal matters with her. PW.2, her husband and her
mother-in-law were equally shocked when the divorce notice was served
on the respondent/wife and they kept quite.
12. Two days thereafter, the respondent left them threatening that the
countdown will start with every one of them. She did not know as to
whether her mother-in-law spoke to the appellant. But, the respondent
came and asked her mother-in-law about the contact of the appellant and
she informed the respondent that she is not aware of anything. The
respondent/wife never stated that she does not like to live the marital life
with the appellant and she would go away to her parents' house. Prior to
the said incident, at that point of time, such conversation was taken place
between PW.2 and others and the parents of the respondent. But only
after receipt of notice in the divorce case, the parents of the respondent
abused them. They never had any intention of filing a divorce case
against the respondent. As they were in a joint family, they used to listen
the discussions of the couple and they have a common kitchen. They all
used to cook together but the respondent used to insist the appellant to
take only the food prepared by her. The appellant used to eat outside
food without able to tolerate the dispute in the said regard.
13. They have advised the appellant several times not to desert the
respondent, but he insisted them that once if he make a decision, he will
not take it back. Mr. Venugopala Chary, is the husband of PW.2 and also
the younger brother of the appellant. He was terminated from his
employment with Canara Bank. PW.2 along with her husband and some
others are facing a Criminal Case in C.C.No.29 of 2002 filed by
C.B.C.I.D. The respondent never possessed any bank account on her
name and the appellant never sent any amount to her for maintenance of
herself and her minor son. He used to send money to his father-in-law
while he was alive and after his death to her husband.
14. The aforesaid admissions would reveal that there are no serious
issues between the appellant and the respondent. They are petty issues
and they can be sorted out.
15. As discussed supra, even in the present case, the appellant failed
to make out any cruel act by the respondent. They are all petty issues.
16. On consideration of the aforesaid aspects only, vide impugned
Order dated 04.05.2012, the learned Family Court dismissed the O.P.
filed by the appellant herein. It is a reasoned order and well founded. It
does not need any interference by this Court in the present appeal. The
appellant herein fails to make out his case. Thus, the appeal is liable to
be dismissed and accordingly it is dismissed. There shall be no order as
to costs.
17. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall
stand closed.
_________________
K. LAKSHMAN, J
________________
P.SREE SUDHA, J
Date:07.06.2024
spk/myk
