JUDGMENT :

B.R.Madhusudhan Rao, J.

1. These Memorandum of Family Court Appeals are filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short ‘FCA’) assailing the order passed by the learned Judge, Additional Family Court at Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar in FCOP No.1625 of 2018 and FCOP No.36 of 2020, dated 18.12.2023.

2.1. Learned counsel for the appellant in FCA No.25 of 2024 and FCA No.26 of 2024 submits that the learned Family Court erred in dismissing the OP filed by the appellant-wife for grant of divorce and also erred in allowing the OP filed by the respondent-husband for restitution of conjugal rights. The learned Family Court has not considered the evidence of the appellant-wife in proper perspective and also failed to look into Exs.P1 to P14 which were marked in divorce OP and also failed to look into Ex.R1 which is marked in the OP filed by the respondent-husband for restitution of conjugal rights OP. The learned Family Court erred in coming to a conclusion that the allegations made by the appellant-wife are not substantiated with supportive material evidence is incorrect. The learned Family Court failed to consider the complaints, criminal cases, charge sheet filed in the case showing the character, conduct of the respondent-husband from the date of Engagement till May, 2018 and then the appellant-wife was subjected to cruelty both physical and mental at the hands of the respondent-husband and his family members. The learned Family Court did not give any finding with regard to the incident happened on 13.05.2018. The learned Family Court erred in not considering the appellant-wife specific plea of cruelty and her submissions that she was driven out from the matrimonial home due to physical abuse, ill- treatment towards the appellant-wife and also failed to consider the grounds of cruelty which is both physical and mental and that the appellant-wife was humiliated, insulted, abused in filthy language by the respondent-husband within 15 days of the date of the marriage.

2.2. The learned Family Court ought to have considered that the fact of the continuance of marriage would be more traumatic and did not consider the submissions made by the appellant-wife and her counsel that the marriage is irretrievably broken down and there is no chance of reunion and ought to have allowed the OP for divorce and dismissed the OP filed by the respondent-husband for restitution of conjugal rights and prayed to set aside the separate orders passed by the learned Family Court in FCOP No.36 of 2020 and in FCOP No.1625 of 2018, dated 18.12.2023.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent-husband submits that the learned Family Court has properly appreciated the evidence adduced by the parties in proper perspective and rightly dismissed the OP for divorce filed by the appellant-wife and rightly allowed the OP filed by the respondent-husband for restitution of conjugal rights. The learned Family Court has examined the matter in minute detail and arrived at a right conclusion that the appellant- wife failed to prove cruelty and decreed the OP filed by the respondent-husband for restitution of conjugal rights. Counsel to substantiate his contention has relied on the decisions in the cases of (1) Savitri Pandey Vs.Prem Chandra Pandey, Indian Kanoon – http ://indiankanoon.org/doc/325522/ - 2002 (2)SCC 73 (2) XXX Vs. XXX, FCA No.196 of 2011 dated 07.06.2024 of the High Court for the State of Telangana.

4. For the sake of convenience, the parties arrayed in FCOP No.36 of 2020 will be herein after referred to as petitioner-wife and respondent-husband.

5. Petitioner-wife counsel has filed brief notes and chronological events in support of his contention.

6. Heard learned counsels on record, perused the material.

7. Now the points for consideration are :

(1) Whether the learned Family Court was justified in dismissing the OP filed by the petitioner-wife for divorce and allowing the OP filed by the respondent-husband for restitution of conjugal rights?

(2)