( 1 ) DR. Motilal B. Naik, J.-This appeal is directed against the order and decree in O. P. No. 139 of 1995 dated 9. 9. 1996 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad.

( 2 ) WIFE is the appellant before us. The husband who is the respondent herein has originally filed O. P. No. 245 of 1994 on the file of the II Additional Judge. City Civil Court, hyderabad which was subsequently transferred to the Court of the Judge, Family Court and re-numbered as O. P. No. 139 of 1995, under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the wife seeking dissolution of their marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion by the wife.

( 3 ) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as petitioner-husband and respondent-wife . The O. P. , is instituted by the petitioner-husband on the following allegations :according to the petitioner-husband, their marriage took place on 25. 5. 1989 according to Hindu Custom and Law. From the beginning, the respondent-wife had no liking for the petitioner-husband and had developed positive aversion towards the husband. She was expressing that her marriage with him was under pressure from her parents. She was frequently leaving the house of the petitioner husband without his knowledge and consent and against his wish. Whether she came to live with the husband, she was staying only for a short period and was going away to her parents house which is also located in hyderabad without informing the petitioner husband.

( 4 ) WHEN the respondent-wife was in the family way and was in third month, she left the house of the petitioner-husband in the month of January, 1990 without informing him, along with all her clothes and belongings. On 16. 3. 1990, the petitioner-husband addressed a letter to the father of the wife intimating the facts and requesting him to send his daughter to his house immediately. However, the petitioner-husband did not receive any response. He again addressed a letter on 23. 3. 1990 to his father-in-law requesting him to send his daughter failing which he would be constrained to take legal steps. Instead of sending his daughter to the petitioner-husband, the father of the respondent-wife gave a reply dated 3. 4. 1990 making malicious and false allegations against the petitioner to which the petitioner gave a prompt reply on 16. 4. 1990 denying the allegations.

( 5 ) ON 4. 5. 1992, the brother of the respondent-wife Sri Ajay Kumar accompanied by three goondas came to the residence of the petitioner-husband and abused him and further threatened him that they will see to it that the petitioner is removed from service. Apprehending risk of physical injury at the hands of the brother of the responent-wife, the petitioner-husband lodged a complaint to the station House Officer, Narayanguda and sought protection. Apprehending malicious prosecution, the petitioner-husband has also obtained anticipatory bail from the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad on 25. 10. 1992.

( 6 ) ON 27. 5. 1990, the. father of the respondent-wife sent a telegram to the petitioner-husband informing him that the respondent-wife was admitted in-Nursing homefor delivery. The petitioner-husband immediately rushed to the Nursing Home but did not find the respondent-wife there. Though a female child was born on 16. 5. 1990, it was not informed to the petitioner-husband. On the instigation of the respondent s father and brother, one Rajeswar Rao, friend of the respondent assaulted the petitioner-husband and caused him bleeding injuries. The petitioner-husband addressed yet another letter on 31. 5. 1990 to the father of his wife requesting him once again to send the respondent-wife of his house. The petitioner apprehending danger to his life at the hands of said rajeswar Rao and others, gave a report to the police, Nampally P. S. on 30. 5. 1990 for protection and also lodged another report on 216. 1990. The wife filed a complaint on 6. 6. 1990 against the petitioner and others under Section 498-A of IPC. T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document