IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the necessity of specific evidence to substantiate claims of cruelty and desertion in divorce proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

K.Lakshman, J.

Heard Sri J. Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel representing Smt.Kanumuri Kalyani, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri G.Manoj Kumar, learned counsel representing Sri P.Srinath, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. Perused the record.

2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 05.07.2011 in O.P.No.377 of 2009, passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad, appellant-husband preferred the present appeal.

3. Appellant-husband had filed O.P.No.377 of 2009 against respondent-wife under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion, contending as follows:

a) The appellant’s marriage with respondent was solemnized on 19.05.2006 at Hyderabad, as per Hindu rites and customs. It is an arranged marriage.

b) By the time of marriage, respondent’s father expired and therefore her mother was not in a position to celebrate the marriage. Therefore, appellant’s mother gave an amount of Rs.2 Lakhs to the respondent’s family for the performance of marriage. She also presented 15 tulas of gold and other articles.

c) The said marriage was consummated and they lead marital life happily for a period of one month. Thereafter, respondent started harassing the appellant on petty issues. He has tolerated the same on the hope that the respondent will change her mind.

d) Respondent started blaming the appellant whenever he speaks with his mother as well as family members and also blaming the appellant that he is maintaining illicit relationship with his sister-in-law.

e) Therefore, respondent did not even allow the appellant to speak to his mother and family members.

f) She started demanding the appellant to live in a separate house, for which, the appellant did not agree.

g) She always wanted the appellant to act on her finger tips and he has to do whatever she says.

h) She used to harass the appellant and his family members with the help of her sister Smt.Aruna, who is working as a constable at Women Police Station, Begumpet.

i) With suspicion, respondent used to escort the appellant until he reaches from his working place. If he comes late from the work place due to traffic jam, she used to suspect him and ask for explanation.

j) Respondent has implicated the appellant and his family members in a false case before Women Police Station, Begumpet where her sister used to work. She has filed a petition under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act vide D.V.C.No.9 of 2009, against the appellant and the same was allowed.

k) He has undergone mental and physical stress due to the said cruelty.

l) Respondent never informed the appellant about her pregnancy and delivery of a child for the last two years.

m) He does not have any matrimonial relation with respondent from 2007 onwards and she herself is admitting that she lost three months pregnancy in 2006 and giving birth to a child in 2007 is a surprise and she only knows the facts.

n) Appellant came to know about the said fact only on going through the petition filed by her in D.V.C.No.9 of 2009.

o) She led a happy married life only for 15 days. Thus, according to the appellant, respondent subjected him to cruelty and deserted him on 15.04.2007 itself.

4. The respondent filed counter opposing the said allegations. Though her father died, her mother and brothers performed her marriage in a grand scale and gave an amount of Rs.3 lakhs towards dowry, 30 tulas of gold and 1 kilogram of silver articles as demanded by the appellant and his mother.

a) She was able to live peacefully for 15 days.

b) Thereafter, appellant, his elder brother, his elder brother’s wife and his mother started ill-treating her by beating her.

c) They have repeated the same when she was carrying third month of pregnancy in the year 2006.

d) At that time, mother of the appellant administered poison in some curry, resulting in an abortion.

e) The appellant and his mother openly threatened the respondent stating that she sho