A. Geethavani, SCJ

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 1 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),

DHARMAVARAM

Present: Smt. A. Geethavani,

Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dharmavaram

Friday, the 11th day of April, 2025

H.M.O.P.No.117/2022

Between:

Devanga Nimmala Ganesh, S/o Devanga Nimmala Narayanappa, aged about 34 years, Hindu, Software Engineer, Resident of Door No.142,413, Near Post Office, Prashanthigram, Puttaparthi, Now residing at Dharmagvaram Sri Satya Sai District… Petitioner

AND

Banda Nandini, W/o Devangam Nimmala Ganesh, aged 27 years, D/o B.Ramesh Babu, Hindu, Software Engineer, Residing at 5-96, Medapuram Village, C.K. Palli Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District… Respondent

This petition is coming on 10.04.2025 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri K.Durga Prasad, Sri T.Baba Fakruddin, Advocates for the petitioner and of Sri G.Ravindra Reddy, Advocate for the respondent, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following :

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 2 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

// O R D E R //

1.This is a petition filed by the petitioner against the respondent under

Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 praying to pass a decree in favour of the petitioner against the respondent by dissolving the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent by way of granting divorce and for costs of the petition.

2. The facts of the petition in brief are as follows :

The respondent is the wife of the petitioner and their marriage was performed on 15.08.2021 at Sri Chowdeswari Devi Devanga Kalyana

Mandapam, near Market Yard, Bathalapalli Road, Dharmavaram as per

Hindu rites and customs prevailed in their community. Immediately after the marriage the respondent stepped into the matrimonial home and discharged her duties as a wife for about one month only. The marriage was consummated, but the marriage was not registered. Due to wedlock they have no issues.

3.The petitioner further submitted that after one month of the marriage the respondent started ill-treating the petitioner and made torture on him that she don’t want to reside with the petitioner’s parents and demanded to put up separate family. The petitioner tried to change the attitude of the respondent, but the respondent did not listen the words of petitioner. The mother of the respondent also supported to the respondent and she also

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 3 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR demanded the petitioner to arrange huge amount for their family needs, but the petitioner refused the same.

4.The petitioner further submitted that the respondent insulting the petitioner before the elders and relatives and quarreled for each and every small things and due to love and affection the sister of petitioner recommended the respondent in her office to get job as Software Engineer, then onwards the respondent started harassing the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner shifted the family from Puttaparthy to

Dharmavaram, but the respondent not satisfied and started scolding the petitioner in vulgar language and she expressed before his relatives and friends that the petitioner in incapable person and he is unfit for marital life and the petitioner bared unbearable torture from the respondent and the petitioner several times requested the respondent to lead happy marital life, but the respondent put deaf ear by listing the words of her mother and continued with rude and adamant behaviour. Eight months back the respondent left the companion of the petitioner without any intimation either to the petitioner or his parents and went to her parents house. Even after the petitioner and his parents requested the respondent, but the respondent and her parents refused and not sent the respondent with the petitioner.

The respondent even not satisfied and lodged a complaint against the petitioner and his family members before C.K. Palli P.S. and it was registered in Cr.No.108/2022, u/s.498-A I.P.C. and Sec.3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act and intentionally included the sisters and brother-in-laws and his old ill-health parents to harass the petitioner. All his efforts and requests

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 4 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR and panchayats are gone to the wind and finally the petitioner decided to have a judicial separation from the respondent and dissolve the marriage between the petitioner and respondent by way of divorce. Hence, the petition.

5.The respondent filed counter denying the allegations mentioned in the petition except admitting the marriage with the petitioner, and further submitted that one week after the matrimonial life parents and sisters of petitioner started demanding the respondent to bring dowry in cash from her parents to complete the construction of new house which was left unfinished before the marriage of the petitioner. The father of the petitioner used to consume alcohol frequently and scold the respondent and her parents for want of dowry. When the respondent informed the behaviour of the family members of petitioner, the petitioner took the matter very light and did not respondent. After four months of matrimonial life, the parents and sisters of petitioner raised seriously their demand to bring cash dowry to complete the house construction. Some times the mother of petitioner used to drag the respondent and beat her. Both parents of petitioner and his sisters used to threaten to neck away the respondent from the matrimonial home if the respondent failed to bring dowry. All of them did not allow the respondent to talk to her parents even on phone and once they had broken the phone to prevent the respondent to talk to her parents.

On haring the plight of the respondent the parents of the respondent consoled and convinced the respondent to bear the situation for some time and they would talk to the petitioner and his parents to avoid torture and

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 5 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR harassment. The respondent many times got advised the petitioner and his parents to avoid harassment, but in vain.

6.The respondent further submitted that the respondent was doing job as Software Engineer and getting Rs.2,00,000/- per month. Due to marriage and corona and at the advice of the petitioner and his parents, the respondent resigned from the job. Again the petitioner and his parents asked the respondent to do job and at their recommendation the respondent joined the job and she was getting about a salary of Rs.20,000/- per month. The respondent used to work from home in the house of the petitioner on a laptop provided by the petitioner.

7.The respondent further submitted that one Varalakshmi the elder sister of the petitioner used to encourage the petitioner and his parents to torture the respondent as to drive the respondent away from the matrimonial home and get divorce from the respondent with a ulterior motive to contract second marriage to the petitioner with the daughter of the elder sister of the petitioner. The petitioner, his parents and sisters finally demanded the respondent either to bring huge sum or agree for divorce to enable the petitioner to marry his sister’s daughter.

8.The respondent further submitted that finally the petitioner and his parents driven out the respondent from their home in the month of January, 2022. The respondent having no other alternative came to her parents home. The mediation led by the parents of respondent to convince the petitioner and his parents to stop harassment and demanding dowry and to

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 6 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR take back the respondent to the matrimonial home went futile due to arrogant attitude of the petitioner and his parents.

9.The petitioner further submitted that even the respondent was sent to her parent home she continued to do job by way of work from home on the laptop purchased by her for a period of three months. As a matter of vengeance against the respondent, the petitioner at the instance of his parents and sisters sent false credential to the company through the laptop left by the respondent at the house of petitioner and they got the removal of the respondent from her job. Now, the respondent has been deprived of all economic and social support from all quarters at the instance of the petitioner and his family members.

10.The petitioner further submitted that the petitioner houses and two house plots. The father of the petitioner is real estate business person and has sound economic status and he earns about lakhs more per annum. The petitioner has been working as Software Engineer for the last 10 years and he is now drawing a salary of Rs.2,00,000/- per month. The petitioner is having no other dependents except the respondent.

11.The respondent further submitted that the parents of the respondent live by weaving and they have no substantial income to maintain their family. Due to the expenditure incurred for the marriage of the petitioner and the respondent, the parents of the respondent are running in debts.

The parents of respondent have another daughter and one son who making

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 7 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR their studies still. They are not in a position to support the respondent continuously.

12.The respondent further submitted that the petitioner and his parents retained all the gold ornaments of the respondent, clothes and many of the articles of the respondent in order to pressurize the respondent to accept for divorce. For no fault on the respondent, the petitioner deserted the respondent and the petitioner is having sufficient means and refusing to maintain the respondent. The petitioner has made unfounded allegations against the respondent with an ulterior intention to get divorce from the respondent and get second marriage with the daughter of sister of petitioner.

13.The respondent further submitted that the respondent has been always ready and willing to join the petitioner and to lead happy marital life with him. The social status and safety of the respondent would be put to great hardship and injury if the divorce is granted to the petitioner. The petitioner had always behaved respectably and obeyed the petitioner and his parents and discharged her duties as a Hindu wife and never tried to humiliate or otherwise injure them. The harassment of dowry was as its peak the respondent constrained to lodge criminal complaint The respondent is always ready and willing to withdraw the complaint if good counsel prevails upon the petitioner to rectify the mistakes on his side and invite the respondent to his matrimonial home to lead a happy married life.

Hence, she prayed to dismiss the petition.

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 8 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

14.On half of the petitioner, the petitioner himself examined as PW.1 and got marked Exhibits P.1 and P.2. Ex.P.1 is the wedding card of the petitioner and respondent dt. 15.08.2021. Ex.P.2 is the marriage photo of the petitioner and respondent along with C.D. On behalf of the respondent, the respondent herself examined as RW.1 and no documents got marked.

15.Heard both sides, perused the record.

16.The point for determination is :

Whether the petitioner is entitled to get the decree of

divorce as prayed for ?

17. POINT:

Perused the oral and documentary evidence adduced by both sides.

The petitioner has filed this petition Under Section 13 (1) (ia) of Hindu

Marriage Act seeking divorce from the respondent on the ground of cruelty.

As per the pleadings, evidence on record there is no dispute regarding performance of their marriage and marital relationship in between petitioner and respondent. In her counter the respondent denied all the allegations and prayed to dismiss the petition.

18.On behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner himself was examined as

PW.1 by filing his chief examination affidavit and reiterated his pleaded

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 9 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR case. On behalf of the respondent, the respondent herself was examined as RW.1 by filing her chief examination affidavit and reiterated her pleaded case. During cross-examination PW.1 and PW.2 categorically deposed that the matter between the petitioner and respondent was settled in the presence of both sides elders, as per the settlement the respondent has received an amount of Rs.7,20,000/- from the petitioner as permanent alimony, all the belongings of both sides are exchanged, there are no chances for reunion between the petitioner and respondent, they have no children out of their wedlock, the respondent agreed to compromise the criminal case in C.C.No.370/2023, u/s.498-A I.P.C. filed against the petitioner and his family members, the respondent has no objection to give divorce to the petitioner and there is no force in it. The counsel for the respondent also filed Full Satisfaction Memo for receiving Rs.7,20,000/- by the respondent from the petitioner towards her permanent alimony.

19.As per the evidence of the both sides, the matter was compromised and the respondent has received Rs.7,20,000/- from the petitioner towards permanent alimony, and the respondent agreed to compromise the criminal case in C.C.No.370/2023, u/s.498-A I.P.C. filed against the petitioner and his family members, and the respondent has no objection to give divorce to the petitioner. Hence, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to decree of divorce u/s.13 (1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act as prayed for. The marriage between the spouses shall be dissolved by decree of divorce with effect from the date of the order.

CNR.No. APAN0D0002252022 10 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

20.In the result, petition is allowed, the marriage of the petitioner with respondent dated 15.08.2021 is dissolved by way of decree of divorce with effect from 11.04.2025. No costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr.II, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court, on this the 11th day of April, 2025.

Sd/- Smt. A.Geethavani

Civil Judge (Senior Division),

Dharmavaram.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

Petitioner Respondent

PW.1 : D.Nimmala GaneshRW.1 : B.Nandini

Exhibits marked for Petitioner

Ex.P.1 :Wedding card of the petitioner and respondent dt. 15.08.2011.

Ex.P.2 :Marriage photo of the petitioner and respondent along with C.D.

Exhibits marked for Respondent

- Nil -

Id/- Smt. A.G.V.

Civil Judge (Senior Division)

CNR.No. APAN0D0000212020 1 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),

DHARMAVARAM

Present: Smt. A. Geethavani,

Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dharmavaram

Thursday, the 10th day of April, 2025

O.P.No.8/2020

Between:

Pitta Raju, S/o P.Narasimhulu, aged about 31 years, Hindu, Weaver, Residing at D.No.2/22, B.C. Colony, Gotluru Village, Dharmavaram Mandal… Petitioner

AND

K.Sugunamma, W/o P.Raju, D/o K.Narasimhulu, Aged about 30 years, Hindu, Housewife, Residing at C.P.I. Kottala, Dharmavaram… Respondent

This petition is coming on 08.04.2025 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri A.Krishna Mohan, Sri K.Bhaskar, Advocates for the petitioner and of Sri S.Krishna Murthy, Sri P.Ranga Naidu, Advocates for the respondent, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following :

// O R D E R //

1.This is a petition filed by the petitioner against the respondent under

Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 praying to pass a decree

CNR.No. APAN0D0000212020 2 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR in favour of the petitioner against the respondent by dissolving the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent by way of granting divorce and for costs of the petition.

2. The facts of the petition in brief are as follows :

The respondent is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and their marriage was solemnized on 09.11.2018 in accordance with the Hindu

Marriage rites and customs prevailed in their community at Veera

Bramhendra Swamy Temple, Dharmavaram. Immediately after the marriage the respondent joined with the petitioner at his matrimonial home.

The petitioner married the respondent without taking any dowry or presentations. During the wedlock they have no issues.

3.The petitioner further submitted that after the marriage the petitioner and respondent lived happily about two months only, thereafter the respondent was always in moody condition and started ill-treating the petitioner for each every aspect in day to day life. The petitioner is moving with the respondent amicably with hope that she will look after the petitioner and attend to his needs, but the respondent gradually increased torture mentally and acting adverse with the petitioner and openly saying that she is not having any love and affection and she don’t want to lead happy marital life with the petitioner. The respondent is having illegal contact with some others and she is always chatting by her cell phone to others cell phone number 9966330757, 9441630409 and 8886311641. The petitioner

CNR.No. APAN0D0000212020 3 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR number of times advised the respondent to change her attitude, but the respondent did not change her attitude.

4.The petitioner further submitted that after knowing the facts the petitioner questioned the respondent, then the respondent quarreled with the petitioner and his parents without any justifiable cause and she went away to her parents house and stayed there by listening the words of her parents. Some elders of petitioner made panchayat and requested the respondent to come and join with the petitioner to lead happy marital life, but the respondent bluntly refused to join with the petitioner. The respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner and his family members in Cr.No.74/2019 of Dharmavaram Rural P.S., u/sec.498-A I.P.C.

and Secs.3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and also filed M.C.33/2019 against the petitioner on the file of Judl. Magistrate of First Class,

Dharmavaram.

5.The petitioner further submitted that the petitioner suffered all the torture with a fond hope that one day or the other the respondent will get change in her behaviour and attitude and will lead happy marital life with him, but his hopes had gone to winds. The respondent is having ill-feelings against the petitioner and the petitioner bared all tortures given by the respondent. The petitioner finally decided to have a judicial separation from the respondent. Hence, the petition.

6.The respondent filed counter denying the allegations mentioned in the petition except admitting the marriage with the petitioner, and further

CNR.No. APAN0D0000212020 4 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR submitted that the respondent never deserted the petitioner at any time.

While living in her matrimonial home the petitioner and his family members started irritating the respondent mentally and monetarily. The petitioner and his family members demanding the respondent for want of additional dowry and to give divorce because the respondent is not in a position to get pregnancy and the petitioner necked out the respondent from her matrimonial home.

7.The respondent further submitted that the family members of the respondent and some elders approached the petitioner and his family members,convened panchayat and requested the petitioner and his family members to take back the respondent to live with the petitioner for that the petitioner and his family members bluntly refused for the same. The petitioner filed this petition with all false and frivolous allegations. Even today also the respondent is ready and willing to join with the petitioner to lead happy marital life if the petitioner change his attitude. Hence, she prayed to dismiss the petition.

8.On half of the petitioner, the petitioner himself examined as PW.1 and got marked Exhibits P.1 and P.2. Ex.P.1 is the wedding card of the petitioner and respondent dt. 09.11.2018. Ex.P.2 is the marriage photo of the petitioner and respondent along with C.D. The uncle of the petitioner i.e. D.Venkataramudu was examined as PW.2 on behalf of the petitioner.

On behalf of the respondent, the respondent herself examined as RW.1 and no documents got marked. One Talari Sreeramulu, who is third party to the proceedings was examined as RW.2.

CNR.No. APAN0D0000212020 5 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

9.Heard both sides, perused the record.

10.The point for determination is :

Whether the petitioner is entitled to get the decree of

divorce as prayed for ?

11. POINT:

Perused the oral and documentary evidence adduced by both sides.

The petitioner has filed this petition Under Section 13 (1) (ia) of Hindu

Marriage Act seeking divorce from the respondent on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. As per the pleadings, evidence on record there is no dispute regarding performance of their marriage and marital relationship in between petitioner and respondent. In his counter respondent denied all the allegations and prayed to dismiss the petition.

12.On behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner himself was examined as

PW.1 by filing his chief examination affidavit and reiterated his pleaded case. During cross-examination PW.1 deposed that :

“Myself and the respondent lived together for 2 years at

Gotluru in my native place. The respondent was previously already married with some other person. I have no evidence about the alleged previous marriage of the respondent, but I came to know that she married with a person belongs to Reddypalli village. After two months

CNR.No. APAN0D0000212020 6 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR of my marriage with the respondent I came to know that the respondent was already married.” “I am believing that the respondent has got illegal intimacy with two or three persons. By the evidence of phone recordings I came to know that the respondent has got illegal intimacy with others.” “I have got phone recordings, conversations by the respondent with two or three persons. I cannot say the names of the persons with whom the respondent alleged to have conversations through phone. Once I checked the cell phone of the respondent and I came to know that the respondent has got illegal intimacy with two or three persons.”

13.In support of his contention, the petitioner also examined one

D.Venkataramudu, who is his uncle, as PW.2. PW.2 filed his chief examination affidavit and supported the version of the petitioner. During cross-examination PW.2 deposed that :

“After two months of the marriage, we came to know that the respondent used to talk with some other male persons and when I questioned she gave adamant reply.

I cannot say the specific names of the male persons with whom some other male persons. We have conducted panchayaths three times.”

CNR.No. APAN0D0000212020 7 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

14.On behalf of the respondent, the respondent herself examined as

RW.1 by filing her chief examination affidavit and his chief examination affidavit is nothing but reiteration of her pleaded case. RW.1 at the first instance in her cross-examination denied the allegations made by the petitioner but again she was recalled and during cross-examination RW.1 deposed that :

“The matter between me and the petitioner recently compromised and accordingly I have no objection to give divorce to the petitioner. We have no issues out of our wedlock. I have accepted to not press the M.C.33/2019 on the file of Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Dharmavaram in the presence of elders of both sides and there is no force in it.

I have accepted to withdraw the criminal case in

C.C.No.524/2019 on the file of Addl. Junior Civil Judge

Court, Dharmavaram which was filed against the petitioner and his family. I have received an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- as permanent alimony from the petitioner today itself. In future I will not claim any maintenance from the petitioner.

In future I will not file any other civil and criminal cases against the petitioner and his family. I have no objection to give divorce to the petitioner and there is no force in it.”

15.On behalf of the respondent, one T.Sreeramulu was examined as

RW.2 by filing his chief examination affidavit and he supported the version

CNR.No. APAN0D0000212020 8 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR of respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner though cross- examined RW.2, nothing was elicited from his cross-examination.

16.As per the evidence of the respondent as RW.1, the matter was compromised and the respondent has received Rs.4,50,000/- from the petitioner towards permanent alimony, and the respondent has no objection to give divorce to the petitioner, and RW.1 accepted to withdraw

M.C.33/2019 on the file of Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Dharmavaram and

C.C.524/2019 on the file of Addl. Junior Civil Judge Court Dharmavaram.

Hence, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to decree of divorce u/s.13 (1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act as prayed for. The marriage between the spouses shall be dissolved by decree of divorce with effect from the date of the order.

17.In the result, petition is allowed, the marriage of the petitioner with respondent dated 09.11.2018 is dissolved by way of decree of divorce with effect from 10.04.2025. No costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr.II, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court, on this the 10th day of April, 2025.

Sd/- Smt. A.Geethavani

Civil Judge (Senior Division),

Dharmavaram.

CNR.No. APAN0D0000212020 9 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

Petitioner Respondent

PW.1 : Pitta RajuRW.1 : K.Sugunamma PW.2 : D.VenkataramuduRW.2 : T.Sreeramulu

Exhibits marked for Petitioner

Ex.P.1 :Wedding card of the petitioner and respondent dt. 09.11.2018.

Ex.P.2 :Marriage photo of the petitioner and respondent along with C.D.

Exhibits marked for Respondent

- Nil -

Id/- Smt. A.G.V.

Civil Judge (Senior Division)

CNR.No. APAN0D0002872024 1 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),

DHARMAVARAM

Present: Smt. A. Geethavani,

Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dharmavaram

Tuesday, the 15th day of April, 2025

H.M.O.P.No.195/2024

Between:

N.Somasekhar, S/o N.Obulappa, aged about 34 years, Driver, Residing at D.No.5-51, Basampalli Village, C.K. Palli Mandal, Now residing at Gotluru Village, Dharmavaram Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District … Petitioner

AND

N.Sreelatha, W/o N.Somasekhar, D/o G.Venkataramudu, aged about 23 years, Tailor, D.No.1-76, Karnatakanagepalli Village, Puttaparthi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District… Respondent

This petition is coming on 11.04.2025 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri K.Naresh, Advocate for the petitioner and the respondent remained exparte, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following :

CNR.No. APAN0D0002872024 2 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

// O R D E R //

1.This is a petition filed by the petitioner against the respondent under

Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 praying to pass a decree in favour of the petitioner against the respondent by dissolving the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent by way of granting divorce and for costs of the petition.

2. The facts of the petition in brief are as follows :

The respondent is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and their marriage was performed on 07-05-2023 at Gotluru village, Dharmavaram

Mandal according to Hindu rites and customs. Due to unawareness the marriage was not registered. Unfortunately no issues were born to the petitioner and respondent. The petitioner got married the respondent with love and affection without taking any kind of dowry. The petitioner himself performed the marriage and spent one lakh to the marriage.

3.The petitioner further submits that immediately after the marriage the respondent joined the petitioner at Gotluru village and stayed with the petitioner till 15-03-2024 i.e. for two months only. During that period the respondent asked the petitioner to pursue her degree. The respondent agreed and joined the respondent at Padmavathi Degree College,

Dharmavaram. After joining Degree, there was lot of change in the behaviour of respondent. The respondent didn’t allow the petitioner to share bed. She refused to cohabitate with the petitioner. The respondent

CNR.No. APAN0D0002872024 3 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR didn’t talk to the petitioner and she openly stated that she is not interested to lead life with the petitioner.

4.The petitioner further submits that the petitioner is a private driver and she goes long distances. Whenever the petitioner goes driving, some unknown person used to come to the petitioner house and the said facts were informed by the neighbours. While the petitioner and respondent were living together, one day the petitioner went to college to pick-up the respondent, but the respondent was not in the college. The petitioner made a phone call to the respondent, but she stated that she was in the college, when the petitioner stated to her that he was at college, immediately she changed her words and stated that she was in the house. Immediately the petitioner went to home, but the respondent was not in the house. The petitioner searched for the respondent, she was found with unknown person in Gotluru tank in an unexpected condition. The respondent was lying down on the unknown person. The petitioner returned to home without any quarrel with the respondent only to fear of his future.

5.The petitioner further submits that the petitioner requested to change all her bad behaviour and lead happy marital life with him, but the respondent bluntly refused. The respondent started harassing the petitioner without any reasons. The petitioner didn’t bear the torture and informed the same to the parents of respondent. The parents of respondent came to Gotluru village and reprimanded the respondent and

CNR.No. APAN0D0002872024 4 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR requested the petitioner to forgive her mistake. Even though the petitioner forgiven the mistake of the respondent, but the respondent didn’t change her attitude. The respondent continuously talking with unknown person on the phone. The behaviour of the respondent became mental torture to the petitioner.

6.The petitioner further submits that the respondent deserted the petitioner on 09-04-2024 and went to her parents’ house without intimating to the petitioner. Since then the respondent has been staying with her parents. The petitioner requested the respondent to join with him, but she refused to join with the petitioner. The respondent and her parents tried to file criminal case against the petitioner with false allegations in Puttaparthi

Police Station, the police conducted panchayat but there were not fruitful results.

7.The petitioner further submits that the petitioner had full love and affection towards the respondent, but the respondent didn’t change her attitude. Due to mental harassment of the respondent, the petitioner suffered a lot. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent has irreparably broken down. There is no chance of reunion between the petitioner and respondent. Hence, the petition.

8.The respondent was called absent, no representation and she was set exparte.

CNR.No. APAN0D0002872024 5 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR

9.On behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner himself examined as PW.1 and got marked Exhibits P.1 and P.2. Ex.P.1 is the wedding card of petitioner and respondent dt. 07.05.2023. Ex.P.2 is the two marriage photos of the petitioner and respondent along with C.D.

10.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the record.

11.The point for determination is :

Whether the petitioner is entitled to get the decree of

divorce as prayed for ?

12. POINT :

Perused the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the petitioner. The petitioner has filed this petition Under Section 13 (1) (ia) of

Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce from the respondent on the ground of cruelty. On the other hand, the respondent remained exparte. Even the respondent is not contesting the matter, it is bounden duty cast upon the petitioner to establish his case by producing cogent and convincing evidence before the court.

13.The petitioner who is examined as PW.1 in his evidence he categorically deposed that the respondent is his legally wedded wife and their marriage was performed on 07-05-2023 according to Hindu rites and

CNR.No. APAN0D0002872024 6 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR customs. Immediately after the marriage the respondent joined with him and stayed with him till 15-03-2024 i.e. for two months only, during that period the respondent asked him to pursue her degree, he agreed and joined the respondent at Padmavathi Degree College, Dharmavaram, after that there was lot of change in the behaviour of respondent, she didn’t allow him to share bed and refused to cohabitate with him. The respondent didn’t talk to him and she openly stated that she is not interested to lead life with him. He further deposed that he is a private driver and whenever he goes driving, some unknown person used to come to his house and the said facts were informed by the neighbours. While they were living together, one day he went to college to pick-up the respondent, but the respondent was not in the college, he made a phone call to the respondent, but she stated that she was in the college, when he stated to her that he was at college, immediately she changed her words and stated that she was in the house. Immediately he went to home, but the respondent was not in the house and he searched for the respondent, she was found with unknown person in Gotluru tank in an unexpected condition.

14.PW.1 further deposed that he requested the respondent to change all her bad behaviour and lead happy marital life with him, but the respondent bluntly refused. The respondent started harassing him without any reasons. He didn’t bear the torture and informed the same to the parents of respondent and the parents of respondent came to Gotluru village and reprimanded the respondent and requested him to forgive her mistake, even though he had forgiven the mistake of the respondent, but

CNR.No. APAN0D0002872024 7 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR the respondent didn’t change her attitude. The respondent continuously talking with unknown person on the phone. The behaviour of the respondent became mental torture to him.

15.PW.1 further deposed that the respondent deserted him on 09-04-2024 and went to her parents’ house without intimating to him. Since then the respondent has been staying with her parents. He requested the respondent to join with him, but she refused to join with him. The respondent and her parents tried to file criminal case against him with false allegations in Puttaparthi Police Station, the police conducted panchayat but there were not fruitful results. He further deposed that he had full love and affection towards the respondent, but the respondent didn’t change her attitude. Due to mental harassment of the respondent, he suffered a lot.

The marriage between him and respondent has irreparably broken down and there is no chance of reunion.

16.On a careful consideration of the evidence on record, this Court holds that the petitioner has been able to establish that the respondent by her conduct has caused mental cruelty to the petitioner. The respondent was remained exparte. It is a fit case to grant divorce on ground of cruelty. So, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for decree of divorce as prayed for. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent shall be dissolved by decree of divorce with effect from the date of the order.

CNR.No. APAN0D0002872024 8 Civil Judge’s Court, (Sr.Division) DMM-FAIR 17.In the result, petition is allowed. The marriage of the petitioner with the respondent dated 07.05.2023 is dissolved by way of decree of divorce with effect from 15.04.2025. No costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr.II, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court, on this the 15th day of April, 2025.

Sd/- Smt. A.Geethavani

Civil Judge (Senior Division),

Dharmavaram.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

Petitioner Respondent

PW.1 : N.Somasekhar - NIL -

Exhibits marked for Petitioner

Ex.P.1 :Wedding card of the petitioner and respondent dt. 07.05.2023.

Ex.P.2 :Two marriage photos of petitioner and respondent along with C.D.

Exhibits marked for Respondent

- Nil -

Id/- Smt. A.G.V.

Civil Judge (Senior Division)

CNR.No.APAN0D0001932023 1 ASJ Court, DMM-FAIR

IN THE COURT OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE ::

DHARMAVARAM

Present: Smt. A.Geethavani, Assistant Sessions Judge, Dharmavaram

Thursday, the 10th day of April, 2025

SESSIONS CASE No.195/2023

Between:-

Sub-Inspector of Police, Tadimarri P.S.… Complainant

Vs.

1. Jade Shankaraiah @ Shankara, S/o Jade Pedda Ganganna, age 40 years

2. Jade Gangaiah, S/o Jade Pedda Ganganna, aged 48 years

3. Jade Shivaiah, S/o Jade Naganna, aged 48 years

4. Jade Adi Narayana, S/o Jade Nagappa, aged 46 years

5. Jade Gangaiah, S/o Jade Nagappa, aged 45 years

6. Dandu Yallappa @ Pedda Yallappa, S/o Dandu Yallappa, aged 47 years

7. Dandu Yallappa @ Chinna Yallappa, S/o Yallappa, aged 36 years

8. Jade Gangaiah @ Pedda Gangaiah, S/o Jade Narayana, aged 50 years

All are R/o Nayanapalli Village,

Tadimarri Mandal... Accused

CNR.No.APAN0D0001932023 2 ASJ Court, DMM-FAIR

Natureof:Mischief by fire or explosive substance with offenceintent to destroy house etc. with common and Section ofintention, an offence punishable u/s.436 read lawwith 34 Indian Penal Code against the accused.

Plea of the :Not guilty Accused

Finding of the :A.1 to A.8 are not found guilty of the offence

Judgepunishable under Section 436 read with 34 of

Indian Penal Code.

Sentence or :A.1 to A.8 are acquitted u/s.232 of Cr.P.C. Order

The prosecution was conducted by Sri D.Fakruddin, Additional Public

Prosecutor, Dharmavaram and the accused were defended by

Sri B.Noor Mohammad, Advocate.

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Tadimarri P.S. filed charge sheet against A.1 to A.8 in Cr.No.92/2018 of Tadimarri P.S. alleging that LW.1-

Dandu Nageswaramma is resident of Nayanapalli village, Tadimarri Mandal and she is living by cultivation and also running a petty bunk at their village.

LW.1-Dandu Nageswaramma has blessed with one daughter by name

Prasanthi, aged 18 years and two sons (1) Pavan, aged 14 years, studying 6th class at Thimmampalli village (2) Ashok, aged 13 years, studying 6th class at Narpala. There are some ill-feelings between LW.1-Dandu

Nageswaramma and her villager Jade Gangaiah regarding a house site. In this regard, the accused party filed a civil case against the husband of

LW.1-Dandu Nageswaramma, and the Hon’ble Court conducted trial and

CNR.No.APAN0D0001932023 3 ASJ Court, DMM-FAIR sentenced conviction against the husband of LW.1-Dandu Nageswaramma and at present the husband of LW.1-Dandu Nageswaramma is lodged in

Central Prison, Kadapa. On 10.12.2018 at about 10.00 A.M., while none were present in the house of LW.1-Dandu Nageswaramma, A.1 to A.8 formed into a group went to the house of LW.1-Dandu Nageswaramma by keeping previous litigation in mind, with intent to cause mischief to her by setting fire, and A.1 put fire to a woolen cloth into house of LW.1 through window, due to which the TV, Fridge, Cell phone and Kirana articles which were in the house were burnt. LW.2-Dandu Yellappa witnessed the same, raised cries and on hearing the cries, LW.3-Thoti Ramu, LW.4-Chakali

Shankara and LW.5-Arveti Raja came there and on seeing them, all the accused were ran away. Immediately LW.2-Dandu Yallappa informed

LW.1-Dandu Nageswaramma, who rushed to the shop and observed that smoke is coming from window then she opened the window doors and found that T.V., Firdge, Cellphone and the Kirana Articles were burnt into ashes and caused loss.

2.On the complaint of LW.1-Dandu Nageswaramma a case was registered in Cr.No.92/2018, u/s.436 r/w.34 I.P.C. of Tadimarri P.S. and investigated into.

3.During the course of investigation, LW.8-V.Venugopal, Sub-Inspctor of Police, Tadimarri P.S. examined and recorded the statements of LW.1-

Dandu Nageswaramma, LW.2-Dandu Yallappa, LW.3-Thoti Ramu, LW.4-

Chakali Shankara and LW.5-Arveti Raja, visited the scene of incident, seized the property in the presence of LW.6-J.Nagaraju and LW.7-Dandu

Suryanarayana, under cover of scene observation mahazar and seizure mahazar.

CNR.No.APAN0D0001932023 4 ASJ Court, DMM-FAIR

4.The learned Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Dharmavaram took cognizance against the accused for the offence punishable u/s.436 r/w.34

I.P.C. and numbered as P.R.C.9/2019 and has committed the same to the

Court of Sessions, as the offence u/s.436 I.P.C. is exclusively triable by

Sessions Court and the Hon'ble Sessions Judge, Anantapuramu numbered

as S.C.195/2023 and made over the said case to the Court of Asst.

Sessions Judge, Dharmavaram for disposal according to law.

5.On appearance of accused 1 to 8 they are examined u/s.228 Cr.P.C.

by framing a charge U/s.436 r/w.34 I.P.C., read over and explained to them in Telugu, for which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.To prove its case, the prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 5 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.6. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has given-up

LW.6-J.Nagaraju, LW.7-Dandu Suryanarayana, LW.8-V.Venugopal, Sub-

Inspector of Police, Tadimarri LW.9-Sharath Chandra, S.I. of Police

Tadimarri P.S..

7.As there is no incriminating material against the accused, the examination of the accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C has been dispensed with.

8.Heard both sides. Perused the record.

9.Now the point for determination is:-

Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of A.1 to

A.8 for the offence punishable U/s.436 r/w.34 I.P.C. ?

CNR.No.APAN0D0001932023 5 ASJ Court, DMM-FAIR

10. Point :-

The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor argued that the material witnesses are turned hostile as such the official witnesses were given up as no purpose would be served hence prayed to pronounce judgment on merits. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the accused argued that no witness supported the case of the prosecution and there is no evidence in favour of the prosecution, hence prayed to acquit the accused.

11.It is the case of the prosecution that there are ill-feelings between the accused party and PW.1, the accused party filed a civil case against the husband of PW.1 and in that case the Hon’ble Court conducted trial and convicted the husband of PW.1, and on 10-12-2018 at about 10.00 A.M.,

A.1 to A.8 formed into a group, went to the house of LW.1 by keeping previous litigation in mind with intent to cause mischief to her by setting fire, and A.1 put fire to a woolen cloth and put the said fire cloth into the house of PW.1 through window, due to which the TV, Fridge, Cellphone and

Kirana articles which were in the house were burnt.

12.In this regard, though the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 5, no witness supported the case of the prosecution. PWs.1 to 5 who were examined by the prosecution that the A.1 to A.8 set fire to the TV, Firdge,

Cellphone and Kirana articles, but they did not support the case of the prosecution and PW.1, who is defacto-complainant deposed that she does not know anything about the facts of the case, police not examined her, the signature on police report dt. 10.12.2018 belongs to her, signature marked as Ex.P.1, police obtained her signature on white paper and she does not know the contents of police report dt. 10.12.2018. She further deposed that

CNR.No.APAN0D0001932023 6 ASJ Court, DMM-FAIR no burning incident was happened in her house, no cell phones i.e. Karbon company small phone and Samsung company smart phone were burnt in her house, no T.V. Samsung company made in India vide Model

No.CZ21K50SN and Firdge were burnt in her house, the property i.e.

Karbon company small phone and Samsung company smart phone and

T.V. Samsung company made in India vide Model No.CZ21K50sN and

Fridge which are totally burnt and unused are not belongs to her. PW.2,

PW.3, PW.4 and PW.5 who are the villagers of PW.1 deposed that they do not know anything about the facts of the case and police not examined them. Except marking their 161 Cr.P.C statements, there is no incriminating evidence in favour of the prosecution and against the accused. Since all the material witnesses did not support the case of the prosecution, the prosecution given up the official witnesses as no purpose would be served even though they are examined. It is settled legal position that basing on the sole testimony of the Investigation Officer accused cannot be convicted.

13.There is no material evidence of PWs.1 to 5 to connect the accused with the charge U/s.436 r/w.34 I.P.C. Therefore, it can be safely held that the prosecution failed to establish that the accused set fire to the house of

PW.1 and caused mischief to PW.1, and accused are entitled for acquittal.

Hence, this point is answered against the prosecution.

14.In the result, A.1 to A.8 are not found guilty for the offence under

Section 436 r/w.34 I.P.C and they are acquitted under Section 232 Cr.P.C.

The bail bonds of A.1 to A.8 shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months from this day. The Unmarked burnt case property i.e. (I) Karbon company small phone (ii) Samsung company smart phone (iii) One T.V. Samsung

CNR.No.APAN0D0001932023 7 ASJ Court, DMM-FAIR company made in India, vide model No.CZ-21K50SN (iv) one Fridge, vide

C.P.R.No.1/2025, are ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-II, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court on this the 10thday of April, 2025.

Sd/- A.Geetha Vani

Assistant Sessions Judge,

Dharmavaram

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For Prosecution For Defence

PW.1 : Nageswaramma-None- PW.2 : Thoti Ramu PW.3 : D.Yellappa PW.4 : C.Shankara PW.5 : Arveti Raja

Exhibits marked for the Prosecution

Ex.P.1 : Signature of PW.1 on police report dt. 10.12.2018. Ex.P.2 : Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.1 Ex.P.3 : Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.2 Ex.P.4 : Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.3 Ex.P.5 : Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.4 Ex.P.6 : Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.5

Exhibits marked for the Defence

- Nil -

CNR.No.APAN0D0001932023 8 ASJ Court, DMM-FAIR

M.Os. Marked

- Nil -

Id/- A.G.V. A.S.J.

Copy submitted to the Hon’ble Prl. District and Sessions Judge, Ananthapuramu

Copy to the Superintendent of Police, Sri Sathya Sai District

Copy to the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dharmavaram // True Copy //

Asst. Sessions Judge, Dharmavaram

1

In the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge: Dharmavaram

Present: Smt. A.Geetha Vani, Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Ananthapuramu,

FAC Principal Junior Civil Judge, Dharmavaram

Thursday, the 20th day of July, 2017.

O.S.103/2017

Between :

B.Chenna Reddy …Plaintiff

And

Talari Rajanna …Defendant

This suit having been come on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri M.Sankara Narayana Reddy, Advocate for the plaintiff and the defendant remained ex-parte and upon hearing the counsel for the plaintiff and on perusing the material available on record this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The suit is filed by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.58,710-00 on the foot of promissory note with future interest and suit costs from the defendant.

2.The averments of the plaint are that the defendant borrowed a sum of

Rs.45,000-00 from plaintiff on 01.01.2016 agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% p.a. and executed a promissory note in favour of the plaintiff. Inspite of several demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant did not make any payment either towards principal or interest. Plaintiff got issued legal notice dt.08-03-2017 demanding the defendant to pay the debt due under the promissory note, but the defendant did not make any payment. Hence the suit.

3.The defendant received suit summons but failed to appear before the court. Hence he was set exparte.

4.Now the point for consideration is: Whether the plaintiff is entitled for suit amount as claimed?

2

5.To prove the same, the plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 and marked

Ex.A1 and A2 on his behalf.

6.Heard the counsel for plaintiff.

7.Plaintiff, to prove the suit transaction, examined himself as P.W.1 and marked Ex.A1 and A2. Plaintiff deposed that defendant borrowed a sum of

Rs.45,000/- from him on 01.01.2016 agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% p.a. and executed a promissory note marked as Ex.A1 in his favour. On repeated demands made by plaintiff, defendant did not make any payment, hence he got issued legal notice dt.08-03-2017 to the defendant demanding him to pay the debt due under Ex. A1 and the office copy of legal notice is marked as Ex.A2.

8.As observed from the evidence available on record, plaintiff by examining himself as PW1 and by marking Ex.A1 and A2 proved that defendant borrowed Rs.45,000-00 from him and executed Ex.A1 in his favour. On repeated demands made by plaintiff, defendant did not make any payment, thereafter plaintiff got issued legal notice under Ex.A2 demanding the defendant to pay the debt due under Ex.A1. Thus Ex.A1 supported by Ex.A2 proved the suit transaction.

This version of the plaintiff remained unchallenged as the defendant remained exparte. There is nothing before this court to disbelieve the version of the plaintiff.

Hence the plaintiff is entitled for decree as prayed.

9.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for a sum of Rs.58,710-00 (Rupees fifty eight thousand seven hundred and ten only) with future interest at 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the suit till the date of decree and thereafter at 6% p.a. till its realization on the principal sum of Rs.45,000-00 (Rupees forty five thousand only).

Directly typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, on this the 20th day of July, 2017.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Dharmavaram.

3

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

Plaintiff: Defendant:

PW.1 : B.Chenna Reddy -None-

Exhibits marked for plaintiff

Ex.A1 : Promissory note dt.01-01-2016 Ex.A2 : Office copy of legal notice dt.08-03-2017.

Exhibits marked for defendant

-NIL-

P.J.C.J.