Adulterer is a necessary party in divorce proceeding.

A. Shankar Narayana, J.

1. The instant appeal is preferred by the appellant – wife challenging the order in O.P. No.68of 2002, dated 15-05-2003, passed by the Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad, upholding the plea of the respondent – husband, for dissolution of marriage and granting divorce decree under Section 13 (1) (i-a) & (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, “the Act”).

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are, hereinafter, referred to as arrayed in the O.P. before the Court below.

3. The O.P. was allowed in favour of the petitioner arriving at the conclusion that he could prove adultery between the respondent and her employer viz., Ashok, by reason of which, the Court below held that her cruelty against the petitioner was also established. Aggrieved of the same, the instant appeal is preferred.

4. Since certain facts are relevant for proper appreciation of the matter, they are set out, as per the pleas, the parties have put-forth respectively. Their marriage was solemnized on 08-12-1985 at Secunderabad, and their marriage was consummated. Out of their wedlock, two daughters and a son were born. The petitioner alleged that sometime after the marriage, respondent started behaving violently causing physical and mental cruelty to him, but, he withstood the same with a hope that there would be change in her attitude. Since the father of the respondent died in 1997, respondent’s younger sister was shelter-less; she started staying with them and even the petitioner raised Rs.2,00,000/- for her marriage expenses. The petitioner refers to certain alleged acts of respondent in the direction of humiliation caused to him, which details are unnecessary to refer to in the instant appeal. The petitioner alleges that the respondent was leading irresponsible and vagabond life without caring the children and developed extra-marital relations with her employer, a resident of Seethaphalmandi, and she was found moving along with him at odd hours in his car bearing No.APK – 7089 - Maruti Zen and even witnessed by their common relative and mediator to their marriage. Her employer, even threatened him to do away with his life, if he comes in their way, due to which, he suffered heart-attack and admitted in Care Hospital, Secunderabad, and despite intimation given to the respondent, she had no courtesy to visit him. He states that the respondent deserted him from December, 1998, and, therefore, sought the aforesaid relief.

5. Respondent specifically denied the allegations levelled by the petitioner touching the acts of cruelty directed against her. She admits the death of her father taking place on 24-03-1997 in a road accident. She denied the allegations that one S. Gyaneshwar, who is a mediator to their marriage and a common relative, found her on one late night near Tankbund of Fisheries Department, and when he questioned her as to why she was there at that odd hour, she evaded to give reply and that he scolded her. She has also denied the allegation that her employer has threatened the petitioner on telephone to do away with his life, if he comes in their way. She admits that the petitioner suffered heart-attack on 05-10-2000 and was admitted in Care Hospital, but denied the allegation that she did not have courtesy to visit him. She has categorically denied the allegation that she subjected the petitioner to physical and mental cruelty and the desertion alleged by him.

6. In her further pleas, she specifically averred that the petitioner was addicted to consumption of alcohol at Hyderabad and started ill-treating her in filthy language and pressurised her to get gold ornaments and money for doing business and that from the very first day, the mother of the petitioner, who came from village, openly expressed her displeasure against her and used to comment and demand her to bring money from her mother’s house and was instigating the petitioner to marry some other girl for dowry and was insisting her to leave the