Back
2024 Supreme(AP) 463
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
RAVI NATH TILHARI, NYAPATHY VIJAY, JJ.
Koppuravuri Srinivasa Rao - Appellant
Versus
Koppuravuri Venkata Savithri Devi - Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 407 of 2008
Decided On : 13-09-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Smt. G. Jhansi.
IMPORTANT POINT
Long-term separation and lack of communication can constitute grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, recognized as mental cruelty.
Headnote:
Divorce - Hindu Marriage Act - Sections 13(1)(ib), 28 - The court interpreted the provisions regarding grounds for divorce, emphasizing long-term separation and mental cruelty as valid grounds for dissolution of marriage.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed for divorce citing desertion after the respondent left him and did not return despite repeated requests. The respondent countered with claims of ill-treatment and dowry demands.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the marriage had irretrievably broken down due to long separation and lack of communication, supporting the appellant's claim for divorce.
Issues: Whether the appellant is entitled to a divorce based on the grounds of desertion and irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that long-term separation and lack of cohabitation constitute mental cruelty, justifying the grant of divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Result: The appeal is allowed, and the marriage is dissolved with a decree of divorce granted to the appellant.
JUDGMENT :
Nyapathy Vijay, J.
This Appeal is filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act questioning the judgment and decree dated 06.11.2007 passed in HMOP.No.54 of 2005 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District.
2. The brief facts are as under:
Appellant is the Petitioner. As per the petition, the marriage between the Petitioner and Respondent was performed on 09.04.2000 as per Hindu Rites and Customs at Arya Vysya Kalyana Mandapam in Akividu Village and Mandal, West Godavari District. After the marriage, the Petitioner took the Respondent to Bhimavaram, where they lived together. About three months after the marriage, the Respondent became pregnant and parents of the Respondent took her to their house. The Respondent thereafter gave birth to a baby boy. Even after five months after the delivery, the Respondent did not join the marital life with the Petitioner even though the Petitioner was requesting the parents of the Respondent and Respondent for the same. After repeated requests, it was stated that a condition was put that the Petitioner should take a separate residence and accordingly, the Petitioner took a separate residence in Bhimavaram to live with the Respondent. However, the Respondent used to neglect the Petitioner and used to go to her parents house without informing the Petitioner. On 20.02.2003, the Respondent without intimation to the Petitioner went to her parents place taking all the gold ornaments. In spite of repeated requests, the Respondent did not join the Petitioner. Hence, the application was filed for a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion under Section 13(1) (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956.
3. The Respondent filed counter pointing out various incidents of ill-treatment. However, it was admitted in para 6 of the counter that the Petitioner came to the parents house of Respondent in May, 2002 and requested to send the Respondent and that he will take good care of her. It was pleaded that even though the Petitioner took a separate house, but failed to provide basic needs and used to take meals at his parents’ house. It was stated that in July, 2002 the Petitioner abused the Respondent and left her. With nowhere to go, the Respondent called up her parents and even though the mother of the Respondent pleaded with the Petitioner to lead a happy married life, the Petitioner did not agree for the same and had abused the mother of the Respondent. It was further pleaded that the Petitioner demanded an additional dowry of Rs.1 lakh. Hence, sought for dismissal of the application.
4. In the course of trial, the Petitioner examined five witnesses and marked Exs.A.1 and A.2 on his behalf. The Respondent got himself examined as R.W.1 and also examined her mother as R.W.2. The trial Court after hearing the respective parties, dismissed the O.P that no grounds are made out for grant of divorce. Hence, the present appeal is filed.
5. In this appeal, though notices were issued to Respondent, at the time of filing of the appeal, the same was returned unserved with an endorsement ‘door locked’. This Court on 08.07.2024 directed fresh notice to the Respondent. On 12.08.2024, a memo with proof of service was filed annexing the track consignment report and submitting that the item was delivered to the addressee.
6. An affidavit was filed by the Petitioner on 19.08.2024 stating that since 20.02.2003, the Petitioner and Respondent are living separately and there is no communication between the parties. It was further stated in the affidavit that there is no possibility of staying together. The issue that falls for consideration in this appeal is, whether the appellant is entitled for divorce?.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on two judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court i.e. Shri Rakesh Raman v. Smt. Kavita, 2023 Livelaw (SC) 353 and Prakash Chandra Joshi v. Kuntal Prakashchandra Joshi @ Kuntal Visanji Shah, 2024 SCC Online SC 68 : 2024 INSC 54 (neutral citation).
8. In Shri Rakes
