HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY FAMILY COURT AP PEAL No.4 OF 2014 ALONG WITH I.A. No.1 OF 2025 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman)

Heard Mr. Pasham Ravindra Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant - wife and Mr. J. Suresh Babu, learned counsel for the respondent - husband.

2. This Family Court Appeal is preferred by the appellant challenging the order dated 30.01.2013 in O.P. No.27 of 2009 passed by learned Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nalgonda, granting decree of divorce by dissolving the marriage tie between the appellant and the respondent held on

31.03.2000.

3. The appellant herein is the wife and the respondent herein is the husband. He filed the aforesaid O.P. No.27 of 2009 under Section - 13 (1) (ia) (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, against the appellant - wife, seeking decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

4. The respondent filed the aforesaid OP on the following grounds:

i. Their marriage was held on 31.03.2000 as per Hindu rites and customs.

ii. After the marriage, the appellant joined the company of the respondent.

iii. Out of their wedlock, they were blessed with a female and male child, namely Ms. Sona Chandini and Mr. Yuvaraj.

iv. Thereafter, disputes arose between the parties on account of conduct of the appellant as she was in the habit of dominating the respondent as she is a graduate in science, whereas the respondent studied up to SSC.

v. The appellant used to demand money for unnecessary expenditure. Since the respondent is working as a technician in Photo Studio, he is unable to meet her luxury money demands.

vi. She went to her parents’ house at Hyderabad in the year 2005 and refused to rejoin his company. However, at the intervention of elders, to lead happy marital life, both the parties agreed to live together and accordingly reduced into writing an undertaking on 13.03.2005.

vii. Even then, there was no change in the attitude of the appellant and went to her parents’ house in May, 2005 without informing the respondent.

viii. Despite the efforts put forth by the respondent including issuance of notice in September, 2006, the appellant did not join his company.

ix. The appellant filed a maintenance petition under Section - 20 (1) of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the same was registered as Pre Litigation Case No.3 of 2006 and an award was passed on 30.12.2006 by the Lok Adalat, wherein the parties agreed to live together and the respondent undertook to pay an amount of Rs.1,500/- towards maintenance to her and children.

x. On arrival of the appellant to the house of the respondent, it was found that she was carrying pregnancy. Therefore, he got examined her in Venkateshwara Nursing Home, Nalgonda on 03.02.2007. After getting a lab report, the doctor opined that the appellant was carrying pregnancy of six (06) weeks. Therefore, the respondent entertained a doubt for the said pregnancy and questioned her as to how she was carrying six weeks of pregnancy when she rejoined his society only on

17.01.2007.

xi. Therefore, the appellant gave a report on 06.02.2007 alleging demand of additional dowry by the respondent and the same was registered as Crime No.26 of 2007 by Women Police Station, Nalgonda for the offences under Sections - 498A and 506 of IPC and Sections - 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. After completion of investigation, the police laid charge sheet and the same was numbered as C.C. No.53 of 2007. However, it was ended in acquittal.

x ii. She has also filed a petition under Section - 25 of Cr.P.C. vide M.C. No.282 of 2007 before the learned Judge, Additional Family Court, Hyderabad, seeking maintenance, wherein an amount of Rs.3,000/- was ordered to be paid by the respondent to her and an amount of Rs.1,500/- each to the children.

5. The appellant herein filed counter denying the claim of the respondent on the following grounds:

i. At the time of marriage, her pare