Telangana High Court
G.K.Chakravarthy vs Smt.Vijaya Sri on 7 November, 2025
Author: K.Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY
FAMILY COURT APPEAL No.1 of 2015
JUDGMENT:
(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice K.Lakshman)
Heard Ms.T.V.Sridevi, learned counsel for the appellant.
Notice sent to the respondent was returned unserved with an
endorsement 'left'. Sending notice to the respondent to the
address available is sufficient in terms of Section 27 of the
General Clauses Act, 1897. There is no representation on
behalf of the respondent. We have recorded the said fact vide
order dated 29.10.2025. We have perused the record.
2. Appellant is the husband and respondent is the wife.
Their marriage was performed on 15.11.2013 as per Hindu
rites and customs. It is contended that it is a second marriage
for both of them. Appellant has filed an application under
Section 12(2)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 vide
F.C.O.P.No.34 of 2014 on the file of learned the Judge, Family
Court, Hyderabad, against respondent/wife to declare the said
marriage as nullity and to annul the same by way of decree,
contending that she had left the company of the appellant on
the same day of marriage i.e., on 15.11.2013 saying that she is
not interested in the marriage. On 16.11.2013 the appellant and
his parents made several phone calls to the aunt of the
respondent i.e., Smt.Vijaya Lakshmi to enquire about
respondent's position, who sought some time as the
respondent is not interested to join the marital life of the
appellant. Appellant waited ten (10) days with a hope that
respondent will join him and lead marital life. Thereafter,
appellant, his parents along with Smt.Anuradha and elders
went to the house of the respondent parents' to discuss about
the issue and they had lengthy discussion with her mother's
sister and her husband. Ultimately, appellant came to know
that respondent was not there in their house. Therefore,
appellant and his parents asked the respondent parents' to
solve the issue amicably. Even then, there is no response.
Therefore, he has filed the said application to declare the said
marriage as nullity.
3. To prove the said allegations, appellant/husband himself
examined as PW.1 and filed Ex.P.1 - marriage certificate and
Ex.P.2 - marriage photo. Respondent/wife remained ex parte.
On consideration of the said evidence, vide the impugned
order dated 15.09.2014, learned Family Court dismissed the
said O.P. holding that the marriage was held on 15.11.2013,
appellant/husband has filed the said application on 13.12.2013,
within one month after the marriage. He can't file the said
application seeking dissolution of marriage within one year.
Therefore, to get over the said bar, he has filed the aforesaid
application under Section 12(2)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955, to declare the said marriage as nullity.
4. Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 deals with
voidable marriages, it is relevant and it is extracted below:
"12. Voidable marriages.-- (1) Any marriage solemnised,
whether before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be
voidable and may be annulled by a decree of nullity on any of the
following grounds, namely:--
[(a) that the marriage has not been consummated owing to the
imporence of the respondent; or]
(b) that the marriage is in contravention of the condition specified
in clause (ii) of section 5; or
(c) that the consent of the petitioner, or where the consent of the
guardian in marriage of the petitioner [was required under section
5 as it stood immediately before the commencement of the Child
Marriage Restraint (Amendment) Act, 1978 (2 of 1978)], the
consent of such guardian was obtained by force [or by fraud as to
the nature of the ceremony or as to any material fact or
circumstances concerning the respondent]; or
(d) that the respondent was at the time of the marriage pregnant by
some person other than the petitioner.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), no
petition for annulling a marriage--
(a) on the ground specified in clause (c) of sub-section (1) shall be
entertained if--
(i) the petition is presented more than one year after the force had
ceased to operate or, as the case may be, the fraud had been
discovered; or
(ii) the petitioner has, with his or her full consent, lived with the
other party to the marriage as husband or wife after the force had
ceased to operate or, as the case may be, the fraud had been
discovered;
(b) on the ground specified in clause (d) of sub-section (1) shall
be entertained unless the court is satisfied--
(i) that the petitioner was at the time of the marriage ignorant of
the facts alleged;
(ii) that proceedings have been instituted in the case of a marriage
solemnised before the commencement of this Act within one year
of such commencement and in the case of marriages solemnised
after such commencement within one year from the date of the
marriage; and
(iii) that marital intercourse with the consent of the petitioner has
not taken place since the discovery by the petitioner of the
existence of [the said ground]."
5. Referring to Section 12(2)(b)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955, learned counsel for the appellant would contend
that the case of the appellant is falling in the said category. But
it says that notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section
(1), no petition for annulling a marriage on the ground
specified in clause (d) of sub-section (1) shall be entertained
unless the court is satisfied that marital intercourse with the
consent of the appellant has not taken place since the
discovery by the appellant of the existence of the said ground.
6. Perusal of the petition filed by the appellant in
F.C.O.P.No.34 of 2014 would reveal that he has not pleaded
the said ground seeking nullity of the said marriage. As
discussed supra, he filed the aforesaid petition contending that
the respondent left his company on the date of marriage itself
and despite several efforts made by him he could not get the
respondent to his company. Panchayat was also held in
December, 2013. Therefore, the case of the appellant is not
falling within the aforesaid category. On consideration of the
said aspects only, learned Family Court dismissed the
aforesaid O.P. filed by the appellant herein.
7. As rightly observed by the learned Family Court, to get
over from the bar under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955, appellant had filed the aforesaid O.P. under Section
12(2)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking nullity of
the said marriage. It is a reasoned order and there is no error in
it. Appellant failed to make out any case to interfere with the
impugned order.
8. In the light of the same, this appeal is liable to be
dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed. However, liberty is
granted to the appellant/husband to take steps in accordance
with law.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_________________
K. LAKSHMAN, J
__________________________________
VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, J
7th November, 2025.
YNK
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY
FAMILY COURT APPEAL No.1 of 2015
7th November, 2025.
YNK
