M. Anuradha VS Makkina Srinivasa Rao

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

RAVI NATH TILHARI, CHALLA GUNARANJAN
M. Anuradha – Appellant
Versus
Makkina Srinivasa Rao – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Sri Rama Rao Kochiri, Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri Lakshminarayana Reddy, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.—Heard Sri Rama Rao Kochiri, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Lakshminarayana Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This appeal was filed by the wife challenging the decree of divorce dated 08.05.2006, in H.M.O.P.No.225 of 2001 (HMOP), passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur (the Trial court) under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (H.M. Act).

I. Facts:

3. The respondent-husband filed the H.M.O.P pleading inter alia that the appellant is his legally wedded wife. The marriage was solemnized as per Hindu rites, caste and custom on 13.08.1994 at Bapatla in Arts and Science College Premises. He was working as Lecturer in Viswam Coaching Centre, Thirupati. The wife had completed graduation and was staying with her parents. The marriage was without any dowry. Three days after the marriage, the wife told that the marriage was against her wish and will. She started behaving abnormally. After few days of marriage on the pretext to attend duty she went back to Tirupati. For short spells she stayed in the matrimonial home, but her behaviour caused frustration and mental agony to the husband. There was no cohabitation