GEETA LAKSHMI Vs. G V R K SARVESWARA RAO
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
G.V.R.K. SARVESWARA RAO
Click here to view full judgement.
Amareswari, J. -
(1.) This appeal arises out of the order of the subordinate Judge, Rajahmmundry made on 8-2-1979 for divorce at the instance of the husband.
(2.) The wife is the appellant. The parties were married in 1960 and they lived happily for 6 years. Trouble began when the third child was born in the Mission Hospital at Rajahmundry. In view of the health of the wife, the Doctors advised that she should not have any more children and suggested in the circumstances that it is better for the husband to undergo vasectomy operation. The husband resented the idea and immediately left for his place Konthamuru leaving the wife and the new born in the Hospital. R.W.2 the father of the wife took her and the child to his place vedisileru. Sometime thereafter the wife filed O.P. No. 159 of 1967 for restitution of conjugal rights. The petition was allowed on merits on 27-10-1971. The order of the O.P. is Ex. A-2. According to the wife there were some attempts of mediation even during the pendency of the petition for restitution of conjugal rights that she went to the husbands place konthamuru and lived for 15 days after the decree in O.P. No. 159 of 1967, that during that period she was ill-treated by the husband and her mother-in-law that she and her children were kept in a separate room and they were given some paddy for cooking their food separately and even that was discontinued after some time and she was finally driven out of the house and that she had no alternative but to go and live with her parents at Vadisileru. She filed O.S. No. No. 44 of 1972 for maintenance under S. 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act alleging cruelty and desertion.. the suit was decreed on 5-4-1974 under Ex. A-3 and a sum of Rs. 100 was awarded to wards maintenance for the wife and three children.
(3.) Thereafter the husband filed the present petition O.P. No. 16 of 1976 out of which this appeal arises for divorce under S. 13 (1A) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) claiming that the parties had not lived together for 2 years the decree for restitution of conjugal rights, that there were no chances of reconciliation and that he was not guilty of any wrong acts disentitling him to the relief. He also alleged that the wife was guilty of desertion.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.