JUDGMENT :

1. Questioning the validity in the findings given and the consequential conclusion arrived at by the Additional Family Court, Hyderabad, in O.P. No. 889 of 2007 through orders dated 11.01.2011, the present Appeal is preferred.

2. The appellant moved an application invoking the grounds of cruelty and desertion seeking a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage that was solemnized between him and the respondent. The Court, through the impugned order, negatived his request.

3. Heard Sri V. Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Despite service of notice, none appeared for the respondent.

4. Stating that the Family Court ought to have relieved the appellant from the bondage, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondent foisted series of false cases against the appellant and that apart, his mother, sister and brother-in-law were also implicated. Learned counsel submitted that the criminal case, alleging that the appellant and his family members committed offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC, ended in acquittal and the revision preferred also stood dismissed. Learned counsel contended that the respondent filed a Domestic Violence Case and the proceedings in the said Domestic Violence Case were quashed. Learned counsel also stated that it is the second marriage of the respondent with the appellant and the respondent filed a false criminal case against her first husband and extracted money as permanent alimony and the said fact was indeed established before the Family Court. Learned counsel stated that the respondent behaved cruelly with the appellant and ultimately deserted him. But, without appreciating all these facts, the Family Court erred in dismissing his application filed for divorce and therefore, by allowing the present appeal, justice may be done. Learned counsel finally submitted that even the marriage is liable to be dissolved on the ground of irretrievable break down of relationship since several years.

5. The version projected by the appellant through the application filed by him seeking divorce is that his marriage with the respondent was performed on 19.11.2004 at Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams and thereafter, the respondent joined him to lead marital life. However, they resided together only for about 10 days and thereafter, the respondent started quarreling with him on one pretext or the other and made his life miserable. The respondent openly proclaimed that her marriage was performed against her will. She initially demanded to set up a separate family and when the appellant agreed and obtained small portion of a house, she expressed her disinterest to stay with the mother of the appellant. She left the house and went to her parent’s house for 16th day festival which would be performed as per caste customs and did not return back. She filed Maintenance Case with false allegations and also gave complaint to police stating that the appellant and his family members committed offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC. After elaborate trial, the Court acquitted them. Though mediators were sent by the appellant to convince the respondent, their attempts did not yield any fruitful result. During enquiry, the appellant came to know that the respondent married one Kavuri Sambasiva Rao and refused to join him and filed a Maintenance Case against him and obtained maintenance and thereafter, she filed a criminal case against him i.e., her first husband under Section 498-A IPC and later, dropped the case on receiving substantial amount from him. It appears that marriage is a profitable game to her and her parents and thus, the marriage is liable to be dissolved.

6. The respondent filed co