Point of Law : Divorce - A long time separation itself would lead to mental cruelty. Therefore, irrespective of the findings of the lower Court on the failure of the appellant to prove mental cruelty, she is entitled to a decree for dissolution of marriage on the sole reason that there is no possibility for reunion of the parties in order to live together.

ORDER :

C. Praveen Kumar, J.

1. The present Appeal came to be filed assailing the Order dated 22.01.2008 passed in H.M.O.P. No. 111 of 2003 on the file of V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, wherein, the application filed by the Respondent/Husband herein seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty was allowed.

2. The facts, in the O.P., are as under :

(i) The marriage between the Respondent/Husband and Appellant No.1/Wife herein was solemnized on 06.08.1989 at Block No. 1, Srinivasa Kalyanamandapam, Tirupati Town, as per Hindu rites and customs. After marriage, the Appellant No.1/Wife joined the Respondent/Husband at his residence and lived happily till December 1990 at Tirupati. As the Respondent/Husband was working in U.S.A., he left to U.S.A. and continued with his job there. The Appellant No.1/Wife joined the Respondent/Husband at U.S.A. in the month of August 1991 and they lived happily till 1993. It is alleged that, since 1994, the Appellant No.1/Wife used to insist the Respondent/Husband to send money to her parents for their luxuries. Accordingly, the Respondent/Husband sent an amount of $15,000.00 dollars, but, the Appellant No.1/wife being not satisfied with money sent forced him to send more and more amounts to her parents, who were living in Bangalore. At one particular stage, when the Respondent/Husband refused to send money, relationship strained between them. It is further alleged that the Appellant No.1/Wife never behaved as a dutiful wife.

(ii) It is said that, in the year 2000, the Appellant No.1/Wife without the knowledge and permission of the Respondent/Husband gave a cheque for $10,000/- dollars from their joint account to her father, by name, Subba Reddy, which was dishonoured, on presentation, for insufficient funds. After knowing the fact of dishonour of cheque, through her father, the Appellant No.1/Wife abused Respondent/Husband in filthy language.

(iii) It is averred that, while the Respondent/Husband was in U.S.A., he purchased a house from his own earnings, in the month of January 2000. Since then, the Appellant No.1/Wife used to comment for registering in his name. It is said that, in the year 2002 the Appellant No.1/Wife became pregnant and, as such, her mother, by name, C. Janani, came to U.S.A. in the second week of February 2003 and lived along with them. On the instigation of her mother, the Appellant No.1/Wife started demanding to transfer properties in her name and also demanded to purchase plots only at Bangalore and not at any other places. When the Respondent/Husband refused for the same, he was insulted by her. It is said that, Appellant No.1/Wife often used to remove mangala sutram and wears as and when she likes.

(iv) On 01.03.2003 the Appellant No.1/Wife gave birth to one male child [Appellant No.2] in U.S.A. One week thereafter, at about 4.00 ‘O clock in the morning, when the child was crying, the Respondent/Husband took the child in his hands to console him, but without any reason, the Appellant No.1/Wife raised hue and cry and when the Respondent/Husband questioned the attitude of her, she called her mother and father, who were residing along with them. It is said that, on the next day, the father of the Appellant No.1/Wife shifted the child to another room and the Respondent/Husband was not allowed to see and touch the child. Then the Appellant No.1/Wife telephoned to U.S.A. Police, who came to their house, but she informed them that only to threaten her husband, she called the police.

(v) It is further averred that, on 01.04.2003, the Appellant No.1/Wife and her father threatened the Respondent/Husband not to send any money to his parents and also not to visit his parent’s native place or relatives house, at any time, and further demanded him to transfer all his properties in her name. After withdrawing all the bank balance from the joint account, the Appellant No.1/Wife left U.S.A. along with her mother and Appellant No.2, against the wishes of Respondent/Husband and since then living