The dissolution of marriage requires substantial evidence of cruelty or desertion, which must be assessed contextually, recognizing the complexities of human relationships.

JUDGMENT :

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Lakshman)

Even today there is no representation on behalf of the appellant/wife. Yesterday i.e., on 21.01.2026, we have heard Mr.Shyam Sunder Murthy, learned counsel for the respondent/husband. We have perused the record.

2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 29.07.2015 in O.P.No.989 of 2012 passed by the learned Judge, Additional Family Court, Hyderabad, the appellant/wife preferred the present appeal.

3. Appellant is the wife and respondent is the husband. Their marriage was performed on 20.04.1977 as per Hindu rites and customs. It is an arranged marriage. Out of the wedlock, they were blessed with a male child on 19.02.1978.

4. Respondent/husband has filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, against the appellant/wife seeking dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion contending that both the appellant and respondent lived together in the house bearing No.14-1-429, situated at Aghapura, Hyderabad, which was purchased by the mother of the respondent/husband. His father died during his infancy. Appellant/wife worked as a teacher. Differences arose between the appellant and the respondent as a result of her adamant attitude. She left the company of the respondent/husband and lived along with the minor child. She used to visit the respondent frequently now and then and abuse the mother of the respondent in filthy language. Appellant herein has filed a suit in O.S.No.3113 of 1985 on the file of the learned IV Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for injunction restraining the respondent and his mother from alienating the said house bearing No.14-1-429, situated at Aghapura, Hyderabad, which was acquired by his father. However, the said suit was dismissed on 31.01.1990. She did not prefer an appeal challenging the said Judgment and it has attained finality.

5. It is further contended that the appellant trespassed into the said house despite dismissal of the said suit and tried to dispossess them. She has also damaged the window panes of the house. Therefore, mother of the respondent was constrained to file a suit in O.S.No.1245 of 1986 on the file of the learned VI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for injunction restraining the appellant from dispossessing her from the said house. The said suit was decreed. It has attained finality.

6. Respondent/husband has filed a petition vide O.P.No.446 of 1985 against the appellant herein seeking dissolution of marriage. Appellant has also filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 vide O.P.No.449 of 1985 against the respondent seeking restitution of conjugal rights. O.P.No.446 of 1985 was dismissed, whereas, O.P.No.449 of 1985 was decreed. Respondent preferred an appeal vide C.M.A.No.535 of 1988 aggrieved by the order of dismissal and it was dismissed for default for non-payment of process.

7. Appellant has again filed a petition vide O.P.No.52 of 1991 for dissolution of marriage. She failed to comply with the decree in O.P.No.449 of 1985. According to the respondent, there has not been resumption of cohabitation between the respondent and appellant ever since 20.04.1984 or 16.12.1987. Thus, appellant deserted the respondent on 20.04.1984. According to the respondent, appellant subjected him to cruelty and deserted him. Appellant filed the counter denying the said allegations and contending that she never deserted the respondent as claimed by him. She has also narrated the facts with regard to the filing of the aforesaid suit and aforesaid O.Ps.

8. Basing on the said