MANEPALLI SURYAKANTHAM Vs. MANEPALLI RANGA RAO
LAWS(APH)-1972-7-3
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on July 18,1972

MANEPALLI SURYAKANTHAM Appellant
VERSUS
MANEPALLI RANGA RAO Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Kondaiah, J. - (1.) This civil miscellaneous appeal by a Wife is directed against the order of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Tanuku, dissolving her marriage with the respondent on the ground that there Was non-compliance with the decree for restitution of conjugal rights for more than two years.
(2.) The material facts leading to this appeal and which are not in dispute may briefly be stated. The respondent-- husband married the appellant on 1st April, 1953 at Tanuku according to Hindu rites. As the appellant attained puberty only four or five years later, the marriage was consummated in or about the year 1958. A child was born to them in or about February, 1962 but died very soon after birth. The appellant and the respondent were distantly related to each other even before their marriage. The appellant's paternal grand-father died possessed of some land. R.W. 3 the appellant's mother and her mother in-law had executed a settlement in favour of the appellant giving fome property with absolute rights to her reserving life interest for themselves. Subsequent to the death of the child, misunderstandings and differences arose between the spouses which led to their parting of ways. The husband filed O.P. No. 59 of 1963 on the file of the Sub-Court, Eluru for restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). That application Was resisted by the wife on the ground that he would beat, abuse and ill-treat her and she apprehended danger to her life and hence, she did not propose to live with him. Overruling these objections of a degree for restitution of conjugal rights was passed in favour of the husband on 28th July, 1966. As the appellant herein did not join her husband for more than two years from the date of the decree for restitution of conjugal rights, the present O.P. No. 32 of 1969 for dissolution of the marriage under section 13 (1) (ix) of the Act, was filed by the husband. The appellant-wife in her counter, specifically alleged that the application for divorce Was not maintainable as the decree for restitution of conjugal rights Was satisfied in view of the fact that her husband had led family life with her for a period of 3 months ending With October, 1966 as per the advice of the mediators, R.Ws. 2, 4 and 5. It was further stated that the husband indulged in acts of negligence and abandonment and she filed O.S. No. 49 of 1969 subsequent to the receipt of the notice in the application for divorce, claiming maintenance and separate residence for her.
(3.) The respondent husband examined himself as P.W. 1 in addition to P.W. 2 a relation of his and P.Ws. 3 and 4, mediators who persuaded the wife to live with her husband. The appellant, in support of her defences examined herself as R.W. 1 besides her mother R.W. 3 and R.Ws. 2, 4 and 5 the alleged mediators who according to her, success, fully persuaded her husband and brought him to live with her in her house Cor three months.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.