IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO FAMILY COURT APPEAL No.106 of 2016 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11.03.2026 Between: xxxxxxx Appellant.

AND xxxxxxx Respondent.

This Court made the following:

JUDGMENT

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Lakshman)

Notice sent to the respondent was returned unserved with an endorsement ‘addressee out of station/absent’. Sending notice to the respondent to the address available in the bundle is sufficient in terms of Section 27 of the General Clauses Act.

2. Heard Ms.Sowmya, learned counsel representing Mr.Sanisetty Venkateswarlu, learned counsel for the appellant.

We have perused the record.

3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 28.03.2016 in O.P.No.971 of 2011 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar, appellant/husband preferred the present appeal.

4. Appellant is the husband and respondent is the wife and their marriage was performed on 25.02.2004 as per Hindu rites and caste customs. It was an arranged marriage. The said marriage was consummated. Out of the wedlock, they were blessed with a female child.

5. Appellant/husband has filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 vide O.P.No.971 of 2011 against the respondent/wife seeking dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. According to the appellant/husband, the moment respondent entered into matrimonial home, her behavior turned out to be contrary and respondent’s family has no values, respect, culture, morals and they are very typical and odd persons and that they only know to drink, there may be occasion or not and that they are habituated to drink cheap liquor and no ethics and they always speak lies even for small things. Respondent always used to make fun of him with derogatory comments on his physical features and she used to compare him with her village boy saying that he has masculine arms and she was very attracted towards that boy. She never cooperated with him in leading conjugal life and bluntly used to say that she was not interested as the appellant was not good looking and handsome. She used to wake up in the morning at 10.00 A.M. and when he tried to talk with her, she used to shout and throw household articles and when he tried to explain her to mend her ways she used to threaten him that she will commit suicide.

6. Appellant further contended that the family members of the respondent decided to perform her marriage with her paternal aunt’s son, namely, Pogaku Nagaraju but the same could not happen. She never considered the appellant as her husband and she used to desert him without any information. Respondent attitude caused mental agony and torture to the appellant and due to the said attitude, he deprived for matrimonial and conjugal life. She left the matrimonial home along with her child on

27.01.2009 without any justifiable reason and appellant tried beyond all the possibility to get her back, but his efforts became futile. Therefore, according to the appellant, respondent subjected him to cruelty and deserted him.

7. Respondent filed counter denying the said allegations made by the appellant. According to the respondent, appellant and his family members harassed her on petty issues and after the birth of the female child the family members of the appellant started harassing her to get additional dowry. Appellant made false allegations against her and harassed her both mentally and physically, but she tolerated the said harassment with a view that the appellant may change his attitude. Appellant restricted her moments and always threatened her stating that he will leave her if she did not listen to him and his parents. She never harassed the appellant at any point of time for any purpose and she never deserted him at any point of time.

8. To prove the said cruelty and desertion, appellant examined himself as PW1 and his mother as