Allegations of cruelty must be supported by evidence; mere separation or previous marital issues do not justify divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.

JUDGMENT :

K. Lakshman, J.

Heard Mr. Neeli Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant - wife and Mr. Vijay B. Paropkari, learned counsel for the respondent - husband.

2. Assailing the order dated 06.02.2015 in FOP No.31 of 2013 passed by learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VIII Additional District Judge at Mahabubnagar, the appellant herein preferred the present appeal.

3. The appellant herein is the wife and the respondent is her husband. Their marriage was performed on 20.05.2005 as per Hindu rites and customs. It is an arranged marriage.

4. It is apt to note that the respondent herein obtained a decree of divorce with his first wife, and informing the said fact, he married the appellant herein. The appellant in her deposition also admitted the said fact. Out of their wedlock, they were blessed with one daughter and son, who are now aged 18 and 19 years respectively. The respondent is an Employee in Railway Department.

5. The respondent has filed the aforesaid FOP No.31 of 2013 under Section - 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act against the appellant herein seeking dissolution of their marriage on the ground of ‘cruelty’ contending that:

i. From the date of marriage, the appellant dislikes the respondent, but she married him as her parents forced her to marry the respondent.

ii. She used to visit her parents house frequently and repeatedly. Even she left the house without his and his parents’ consent. She also left the house on 04.04.2008 without information and residing with her parents. Despite the elders and relatives convicted the appellant, she did not change her behavior.

iii. Appellant threatened the respondent that if he insists her to live with him, she would kill him.

iv. To evade the petition filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights, the appellant gave a report with Police, Kondurg on 17.04.2008 against the respondent herein, his mother, sisters and brother-in-law and the same was registered as Crime No.35 of 2008 for the offences punishable under Section - 498A of IPC and Sections - 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. However, the same was ended in acquittal vide C.C. No.153 of 2008.

v. The appellant has filed a petitioner under Section - 125 of Cr.P.C. vide M.C. No.6 of 2008, seeking maintenance, where the children were only granted maintenance. However, in the revision vide Crl.R.P. No.87 of 2011, maintenance of Rs.1,500/- per month was granted to the appellant herein, while confirming the amount of Rs.1,000/- granted to her children each, making a total of Rs.3,500/- per month was awarded, and the same has been paying by the respondent herein.

vi. There is no possibility of re-union. Therefore, the respondent filed a petition vide O.P. No.23 of 2008 before the Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubnagar for divorce. During enquiry, the appellant herein stated that she would come and live with the respondent herein and, as such, the respondent herein did not press the said petition and the same was dismissed as not pressed on 19.04.2010.

vii. Later, the appellant came and joined the company of the respondent for about one (01) month. During the said period, the appellant made the life of the respondent miserable, and left the house of respondent on 20.05.2010 without information to him and has been living with her parents.

6. The appellant herein has filed counter opposing the said petition, contending that:

i. The respondent married earlier one Mrs. M. Hemalatha and harassed her. Within a short duration, he filed a divorce petition vide O.P. No.29 of 2002. The matter was settled between them before the Lok Adalat, where they obtained decree of divorce.

ii. The respondent and his elders