*THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO IN/AND + FAMILY COURT APPEAL No.195 OF 2024 % 11—07—2025 # Smt. Harini Kanbham Keshava Moorthy … Appellant vs.

$ Sri. Prasanth Kumar Vatti … Respondent !Counsel for the Appellant: Sri B.Subash ^Counsel for Respondent: Sri A.Praneeth, learned counsel representing Sri P.Lakshma Reddy.

>Head Note :

? Cases referred:

1. Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1774813

2. Civil Appeal No.2112 of 2018 dt. 15.02.2018 of Supreme Court of India

3. Indian Kanoon – http://Indiankanoon.org/doc/84341//

4. 1991 SCC (2) 637

5. Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/2120073

6. Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/25503900/

7. Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/913472/

8. 1979 AIR Andhra Pradesh 169

9. 2019 AIR Kerala 85 : 2019 (2) DMC 605

10. 2014 (1) DMC 325

11. 2015 (1) ALT 251 : 2015 (1) Andh LD 7

12. 2024 (2) Andh LD 859

13. 2024 NCBHC-NAG 1601

14. 2025 NCKERHC 17403 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA HYDERABAD * * * *

IA.No.1 of 2025 IN/AND + FAMILY COURT APPEAL No.195 OF 2024 Between:

Smt. Harini Kanbham Keshava Moorthy … Appellant And Sri. Prasanth Kumar Vatti … Respondent JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 11.07.2025 THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO

1. Whether His Lordship wishes to see the fair copy of the Judgment? : Yes

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Marked to Law Reporters/Journals? : Yes

3. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments? : No _____________________ B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO,J THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO I.A.No.1 of 2025 IN/AND F.C.A.NO.195 OF 2024 JUDGMENT:(per Justice B.R.Madhusudhan Rao)

1. The present Appeal is filed by the appellant/petitioner aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar in FCOP.No.2536 of 2018, dated

28.05.2024.

2.1. Appellant is the petitioner/wife and the respondent is the husband. The case of the appellant is that her marriage with the respondent was performed on 11.12.2013 at APSRTC Kalyanamandapam, Baghlingampally, Hyderabad, on the same day the respondent failed to perform sexual intercourse. On 13.12.2013, they left for Honeymoon to Kerala, unfortunately during the 9 days trip, there was no sexual intercourse between them since the respondent is having erectile dysfunction. Respondent did not attempt to participate in the sexual intercourse with the petitioner. Appellant and the respondent went for second Honeymoon for 15 days to Kashmir, there also the respondent could not perform sexual activities.

2.2. Appellant has joined the respondent in USA in the month of March, 2015. Appellant came to know that erection deficiency is not cured and surgery is also failed. In the month of April, 2015, appellant and respondent approached the Hospital but the Doctors opined that nothing could be done. Lab Report show that there is extremely low level of Follicle Stimulating Harmone (FSH) and Testosterone.

2.3. Respondent has suffered a lot because of the pain and pus of the lumps grown near to testicles and the appellant has served the respondent like that of his mother during her stay with him between March, 2015 to 2018. In the year 2017, after verifying all the reports and the investigations done by the Doctors, it is confirmed that the respondent is not fit for marital life and there is no possibility of having children. Respondent left USA in the year 2018 by leaving the appellant there at. Appellant suffered unbearable torture because of the incidents and she became helpless and lost her health, life, money and facing trauma. Respondent is not performing sexual intercourse due to erectile dysfunction and prayed to grant divorce on the ground of nullity of marriage, cruelty and permanent alimony of Rs.90 Lakhs.

3.1. Respondent filed his counter and contended that he knows the appellant from November, 2007 when they joi