AND FAMILY COURT APPEAL No.144 OF 2015 Judgment: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman)

Heard Sri Bethi Venkateswarlu, learned counsel for the appellant. Notice sent to respondent No.1 was returned un-served with an endorsement “unclaimed”, which amounts to service.

2. Appellant-husband preferred the present appeal challenging the order dated 20.07.2010 in F.C.O.P.No.13 of 2010, passed by learned Judge, Family Court-Cum-

Additional District and Sessions at Karimnagar.

3. The appellant has filed a petition under Section 13(1) (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, vide F.C.O.P.No.13 of 2010 against the respondent seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion. The marriage of appellant and respondent was solemnized on 30.05.1975 as per Hindu rites and customs. They lived happily at Karimnagar district for a period of 31 years and they blessed with four children i.e., two daughters and two sons.

4. According to the appellant, the respondent deserted him on 20.01.2007 and she has not informed her whereabouts. Despite of his best efforts, he could not get the company of the respondent. Therefore, he has filed the aforesaid F.C.O.P. seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion.

5. To prove the said desertion, the appellant examined himself as PW1 and filed two exhibits i.e., Joint Photo and copy of House-hold card as Ex.P1 and Ex.P2. Respondent was set ex parte. On consideration of the evidence both oral and documentary evidence, learned Family Court vide order dated 20.07.2010 dismissed F.C.O.P.No.13 of 2010 holding that appellant herein failed to prove the said desertion.

6. In paragraph No.8 of the impugned order, the learned Family Court gave a specific finding that the allegations made against the respondent in the petition are very vague and not clear and that P.W.1-appellant herein did not choose to examine any of the elders, his married daughters and his younger son to substantiate his contention that without any reasonable cause, the respondent has deserted him in the year 2007. He has also failed to establish that respondent refused to join his company.

7. As discussed supra, except examining himself as PW.1, the appellant did not examine any other witness and he has not filed any documents. Burden lies on the appellant to plead and prove the said desertion. In the present case, appellant failed to discharge the said burden. On consideration of the said aspects only, vide order dated 20.07.2010, learned Family Court dismissed the said F.C.O.P.No.13 of 2010. It is a reasoned order and well founded. The appellant failed to make out any case to interfere with the said order by this Court in the present appeal. Therefore, the present Appeal is liable to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, this Appeal is dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

K. LAKSHMAN, J VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, J

23.10.2025

ADT/GNP