Sri.N.Santhosh Kumar

Page No. 1 of total 8 pages. Orders in F.C.0.P.No.58/2020

IN THE cOURT OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT-CUM-III

ALDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (Formerly VIH

Additional District and Sessions Judge) AT MAHABUBNAGAR.

Present: Sri N. Santosh Kumnar,

Judge, Family Court-cum

II Addl.District and Sessions

Judge, Mahabubnagar.

Tuesday, the 19th day of July, 2022.

F.C.0.P.No.58 of 2020

ORDE R

This Family Court Original Petition filed by the Petitioner

Undér Section 13 1(ia) & (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 praying

this Court to grant a Decree of Divorce by dissolving the marriage oY

the Petitioner and the Respondent dt:08.05.2009 on the grounds of

cruelty and desertion.

No. 58/2020 Orders in FCO P'agc No2 of'total 8 pages 1ne brief case of the Petitioner as disclosed from the petition 15 2 that the Respondent is the lcgally wedded wife of the Petitioner and the marriage of the Petitioner and the Respondent wvas solemnized On

O8.05.2009 at the house of the Petitioner. The Petitioner further submitted that after the marriage, the Respondent started harassng the Petitioner to leave his old-aged parents and to shift the family to her parental house, though there wass sufficient facilities in the house tor the privacy of the couple, she persistently insisted the Petitioner for separate family and that the Petitioner is refused the proposal of the respondent as he was in a hope that his outsourcing job in

Revenue Department at Naga�kurnooB may be regularized by the

Goverment to lead a honourable life in the society. The Petitióner further submitted that the Respondent never served either the

Petitioner or his parents with love and affection and that one week after their marriage, the Respondent went to her parents house and did not turn up and the Petitioner called her and to his surprise, the

Respondent stated that she is not interested and not willing to join the family of the Petitioner and the marriage was performed against her will, as such she is not ihterested to lead further marital life

Thereafter the Respondent conceived and became pregnant and during that stage also the Respondent never treated the Petitioner with love and affection and used to throw household articles at the

Petitioner uttering that he is ugly and at the instance of her parents only she married him and several times the Respondent abu[ed the

Pace No,3 of total S pagcs Orders in ECOP.No 58/2020

SPetitioner in unparliamentary

language in front of his family mnembers and re<atives, the Petitioner being a generous person bear all.the harassment, cruelty and humiliation silently as the attitude of her will

Cnanged one or the other day The Petitioner further submitted nat the respondent regularly threatens the Petitioner and his lamily members to file a dowry harassment case, if the family members did not listen to her and at the time of birth of the child, neither the kespondent nor her parents informed the Petitioner about the admission of the Respondent for delivery. On 21.02.2010, the

Respondent gave birth to a male child at SVs hospital at

M¡habubnagar and after the birth of the child the Petitioner and his parents were not allowed to see the child and warned by the family members of the Respondent that if they approached once again they ll file dowry harassment case against the Petitioner and his family JuCac metaers. The Petitioner further submitted that after the birth of the

chid the Respondent stayed at her parental home and did not turn

up, so the Petitioner tried to take the Respondent and his son to og kiMahabubnagar, but in vain and on 10.06.2010 the elders of the

Jandra Community have conducted a panchayath at Mahabubnagar in presence of family members of both sides, but in vain. The

Petitioner further submitted that when the Petitioner questioned about the leaving of his company, the Respondent with the help of his brother-in-laws and relatives the Respondent filed a false Police complaint against the Petitioner and his parents with an intention to

Orders in F.C0.P Page No4 of otal & pages.

humiliate the family of the Petitioner in the society. The Petitioncr urther submnitted that in furtherance of the Respondent's evil intention to harass the Petitioner, on 02.02.2011 the Respondent lodged a written report before the Police-J Town with false and baseless allegations and the same was registered in Cr.No.11/2011 against the Petitioner, his parents and his brother and that the case is numbered as CC No.347/2011 on the file of Hon'ble Judicial First

Class Magistrate (Spl.Mobile Court), Mahabubnagar and after ull fledgedtrial the criminal case is ended in acquittal on 16.06.2017 and also filed a maintenance case against the Petitioner and the same was allowed by passing the order to pay maintenance to the Respondent

No.1 Rs. 1,000/- and Rs.800/- to the male child born out of their wedlock and that the Respondent herein has left the company of the

Petitioner on 02.02.2011, since then she is living with her parents only and that the Petitioner is suffering both physical and mental

cruelty at, the hands of the Respondent. The Petitioner further

súbmitted that the Petitioner suffered depression in life and came to

0 1py i conclusion that there is no possibility of resumption of matrimonial

relationship with, the Respondent. Hence, the Petitioner filed the present Petition to seek a decree of the dissolution of their marriage

dt:08.05.2009 on the ground-of cruelty and desertion.

3. The notice of Respondent sent through Registered post is returned as refused, hence the service of notice held sufficient and no

Page No.S of total 8 pages. Orders an FCOPNo 58/2020

epresentation on behalf of the Respondent, hence, the Respondent

set exparte.

4 m order to prove the case of the Petitioner, the Petitioner examined himself as PW1 and got marked Exs.Pl to P5 in support o his case.

5 Jeard the arguments of the counsel for the Petitioner and perused the material on record.

6. Basing on the contention of Petitioner, now thc point 1or consideration is:

"Whether the Petitioner is entitled for decree of �ivorce-by dissolving the marriage of the Petitioner with the Respondent dt.08.05.2009 as prayed for?"

7. POINT:

The Petitioner examined himself as PW1 by filing the affidavit in of his chief examination, in which he reiterated all the averments of lieu the Petition alleging that the Respondent subjected him to cruelty and deserted him without any lawful excuse. Ex.Pl consist of three marriage photographs of the Petitioner and the Respondent in wedding dress shows the proof of marriage of Petitioner and the Respondent.

Ex.P2 Copy of Aadhar Card of the Petitioner shows the proof of identity

Cr.No.11 /2011 shows of the Petitioner. Ex.P3 certified copy of FIR in about the registration of a crime against the Petitioner, which was lodged by the Respondent at Police Station, Mahabubnagar ! Town.

no.347/201 1 ol judgment in CC is the certified copy Ex.P4 of Judicial Magistrate of First CIs

dt:16.06.2017 on the tile

Orders in FCO No SR/200 Page No 6 of total 8 pages (Spl.Mobile Court), Mahabubnagar. shows that the Petitioner 5 acquitted in the criminal case being lodged by the Respondent. Ex.P5 is the certified copy of order in MC No.6/2011 dt.20.01.2015. shows that.

the Respondent and her son together filed a maintenance case against the Petitioner.

Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides for 8.

decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. It is pertinent to note that the word Cruclty contemplated in the above said provision has not been delined, but it has to be understood from the facts and circumstances of the each case. Generally the cruelty has to be understood as there must be a danger to life, . limb or health, bodily or mental or a reasonable apprehension of it constitutes cruelty.

9 In the present case on hand, the Petitioner in his Petition as well as in his evidence as PW1 stated that the Respondent never treated the

Petitioner with love and affection and used to throw household articles on him by uttering that he is ugly and used to abuse him in unparliamentary language in front of his family members and relatives and 'subjected him to cruelty and humiliation. The above said pleadings of the Petitioner and testimony of PW-1 hasnot been challenged by·the Respondent. Therefore, the above said acts of the Respondent against the Petitioner amounts to an act of cruclty.

Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides for 10 dissolution of marriage on the ground that the other party has deserted the Petitioner for continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the Petition.

I'age No.7 of total 8 paçes Cdcs # FCOP No S8 2020

The Hindu Marriage Act 1gss does not define the exprcssion

desertiorn", but the said expression would mean to understood as

desertion of the Pétitioner hv the Denondent without reasonable cause and without the consent or against the wish of the Petitioner atd includes the willful neglect of the Petitioner by the Respondent.

12. n the present case on hand, the Petitioner in his Petition as well as in his evidence as PW1 stated that on 02.02.2011, the Respondent left his company, since then she has been living with her parents, oniy.

Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides 1or dissolution of marriage on the ground that the other party has deserted the Petitioner for continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the Petition. In the present

case on hand, according to the Petitioner, the Respondent deserted his

company on 02.02.2011 and since then the Respondent has been

stáying in the house of her parents, whereas the Petition was filed on 18.112020 i.e., two years after desertion of the Petitioner by the

Respoulent. The above said pleadings of the Petitioner and testimony

PYhas not been challenged by the Respondent. Therefore, the act

S8the Respondent leaving the company of the Petitioner without any

lawful excuse amounts to desertion within the meaning of Section 13 (1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

In view of the facts, circumstances and the 13 unchallenged. testimony of PW.1, this Court holds that it is just and proper to rant decree of divorce by dissolving the marriage between the Petitioner and

Resnondent. Accordingly, the Point Is answered in favour of the

Petitioner.

Orders in F.C.0.P.No.58/2020 Page No.8 of total 8 pages.

In the result, the petition is allowed and accordingly, r¿.

14.

decree of divorce is granted by dissolving the marriage between the

Petitioner and Respondent dated: 08.05.2009, with effect from the date

of decree.

Typed to my �ictation by the Typist directly on the Computer, corrected and pronourced by mne in open court on this the 19th day of July, 2022.

taut

Judge, Family Court-cm

III Addl. District and Sessions

1 M.C.No.2/2022

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT-CUM-VIII

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE: MAHABUBNAGAR.

Wednesday, this the 1st day of June, 2022.

Present:- Sri N. Santosh Kumar,

Judge, Family Court-cum-VIII A.D.J.,

Mahabubnagar.

M.C.No.2 of 2022

Between:-

1.M. Swathi, W/o. Mandala Vijay, aged about 29 years, Occ: Housewife,

2.Uma Shankar, S/o. Mandala Vijay, aged about 3 years, Petitioner No.2 being a minor, represented by the Petitioner No.1 as natural mother.

Both are R/o. H.No.4-95/1, SC Colony, Yenugonda, Yenugonda Rural, Mahabubnagar.

...Petitioners

AND

Mandala Vijay, S/o. M. Chukkaiah, aged about 25 years, Occ: Private Service, R/o. H.No.4-33/1, Puchakayalagudem Village, Madgulapally Mandal, Nalgonda District-508374

...Respondent.

* * *

This case is coming up for hearing before me in the presence of

Sri Gangadhar Patil, Advocate for petitioners and the respondent set ex-parte to the proceedings, upon hearing the arguments and the 2 M.C.No.2/2022 matter having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:-

ORDER

This is a petition filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C by the petitioner No.1 (wife) and the petitioner No.2 (son) against the

Respondent claiming for maintenance of Rs.35,000/- per month.

2.The brief case of the petitioners as disclosed from the petition is that, the marriage of the Petitioner No.1 was solemnized with the

Respondent on 11.10.2018 at Laxmi Gardens, near SVS Hospital,

Yenugonda, Mahabubnagar as per the Hindu customs and at the time of marriage, the father of the Petitioner No.1 gave Rs.5,00,000/- to the

Respondent besides presented five tulas of gold to the Respondent. It is further submitted that after the marriage, the Petitioner No.1 joined the matrimonial life with the Respondent at Puchakayalagudem

Village, Madgulapally Mandal, Nalgonda District, where both of them lived for some time and after few months, the Respondent and his parents started harassing the Petitioner No.1 demanding for additional dowry and unable to bear said harassment, the Petitioner No.1 come down to her parents house at Mahabubnagar and started residing there since 29.03.2020.

3.It is further submitted that out of their wedlock, on 08.04.2019 the Petitioner No.1 and respondent blessed with the Petitioner No.2 and even after that the Respondent did not look after both the

Petitioners, hence a criminal case was registered vide Cr.No.393/2021 against the Respondent.

4.It is further submitted that, the Respondent is doing a job in

Software Company besides doing real estate business and thereby 3 M.C.No.2/2022 earning of Rs.1,00,000/- per month and that the Petitioner No.1 is a housewife, who has no independent source of income to maintain herself and the Petitioner No.2. Hence, the Petition is filed for claiming maintenance of Rs.35,000/- per month to the Petitioners. Hence, the

Petition.

5.After service of notice on the Respondent, he failed to make his appearance before this Court and did not file any counter, therefore the respondent was set exparte.

6.Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the Petitioners and perused the record.

7.Basing on the contention of Petitioners, now the points that would arise for determination before this Court is :

1. Whether the Respondent neglected to maintain the

Petitioners without any valid reason?

2. Whether the Petitioners are entitled for grant of

maintenance amount from the Respondent? If so,

what is the quantum?

3. To what relief?

8.POINT No.1: The Petitioner No.1 filed the affidavit in lieu of her chief examination as PW1, wherein she reiterated all the contents of the petition. Exs.P1 to P4 have been marked through PW1. Exs.P1 to P3 shows the proof of marriage of the Petitioner No.1 and the Respondent and whereas Ex.P4 shows the proof of birth of the Petitioner No.2.

9.Section 125 Cr.P.C. provided for maintenance of wife, children and old aged parents, wherein any of them are unable to maintain themselves, 4 M.C.No.2/2022 they will be awarded just and reasonable amount towards the maintenance for their livelihood subject to living standard of the

Respondent.

10.PW1 testified that she is the wife of Respondent and that the

Petitioner No.2 is her son born through the Respondent out of their wedlock. PW1 further testified that herself and Petitioner No.2 have been neglected by the Respondent and that they have no independent source of income. Though the Respondent was served notice of the petition, he did not choose to make his appearance to deny the contents of the petition.

Therefore, I hold that the Respondent without any valid reason, neglected to maintain the Petitioners. Therefore, the Point No.1 is answered in favour of Petitioners and against the Respondent.

11.POINT No.2: In view of the discussion in Point No.1 and the conclusion arrived therein shows that without any valid reason, the

Respondent neglected to maintain the Petitioners, therefore the petitioners who being the wife and son respectively of the Respondent are entitled for grant of maintenance from the Respondent.

12.Coming to the quantum of maintenance amount, PW1 testified that the Respondent is doing a Software job besides doing real estate business and thereby earning Rs.1,00,000/- p.m., but the Petitioners did not place any documentary evidence before this Court to substantiate their contention. According to PW1, she is the housewife and has no independent source of income to maintain herself and Petitioner No.2. The

Petitioner No.1 also filed an affidavit of assets and liabilities in which she categorically mentioned all the details, which shows that she has no self 5 M.C.No.2/2022 acquired property and no properties are in the name of Petitioners jointly and that they have no share in any ancestral property etc.,

13.The Respondent who is the husband of Petitioner No.1 and father of the Petitioner No.2 is under legal obligation to maintain them when they are unable to maintain themselves. Section 125 Cr.P.C is a beneficial legislation provided for the maintenance of wife and children when they have been neglected.

14.The contents of the petition and testimony of PW1 shows that, the

Respondent is working as a private employee, who is aged about 25 years.

The Respondent did not choose to deny the contents of the petition and that the testimony of PW1 remained unchallenged by the Respondent. It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that after presentation of this

Petition, no amount was paid by the respondent to the Petitioners.

Therefore I am of the view that it is just and proper to award the maintenance to the Petitioners from the date of presentation of the petition i.e., 25.01.2022.

15.Considering all the above said circumstances and the interest of justice, I am of the view that it is just and necessary to award a sum of

Rs.5,000/- per month to the Petitioner No.1 and a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month to the Petitioner No.2. Accordingly the Point No.2 is answered partly in favour of the Petitioners.

16.POINT No.3: In view of the facts and circumstances, the conclusion arrived in Point Nos.1 and 2, I hold that it is just and proper to award sum of Rs.5,000/- per month to the Petitioner No.1 during her lifetime and sum of Rs.3,000/- per month to the Petitioner No.2 till he attains the age of majority. Thus Point No.3 is answered in favour of the Petitioners.

6 M.C.No.2/2022

17.In the result, the petition is partly allowed directing the respondent to pay maintenance of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five

Thousand only) per month to the petitioner No.1 during her lifetime and Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) per month to the petitioner No.2 till he attains the age of majority. It is further ordered that the above said maintenance amount shall be paid by the

Respondent from the date of application for maintenance i.e., 25.01.2022. The Respondent is further directed to pay a sum of

Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the petitioners No.1 and 2 towards costs of the petition. The respondent is further directed to pay the above said maintenance amount to the Petitioners on or

before 5th of every succeeding month.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court this the 1st day of June, 2022.

Judge,

Family Court-cum-VIII ADJ, Mahabubnagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PETITIONERS: FOR RESPONDENT:

PW-1: M. Swathi (Petitioner No.1) None (Exparte) 7 M.C.No.2/2022

EXHIBITS MARKED:

FOR PETITIONERS:

Ex.P1:Marriage invitation card of Petitioner No.1 and Respondent.

Ex.P2:Marriage photographs of Petitioner No.1 and respondent (06 in number)

Ex.P3:Photo of Petitioner No.2.

Ex.P4:Birth certificate dt.11.04.2019 of Petitioner No.2.

Judge,

Family Court-cum-VIII ADJ, Mahabubnagar.

Page No.1 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.2 /2022

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT-CUM-III

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (Formerly VIII

Additional District and Sessions Judge) AT MAHABUBNAGAR.

Present: Sri N. Santosh Kumar,

Judge, Family Court-cum-

III Addl.District and Sessions

Judge, Mahabubnagar.

Friday, the 15th day of July, 2022.

F.C.O.P.No.2 of 2022

Between:

Y. Ramadevi, W/o. Kota Damodhar, D/o. Y. Parvathaulu, aged 30 years, Occ: K.G.B.V. (CRT) Teacher, R/o. H.No.10-4-32/3/E/1, Jayashankar Nagar, Near Housing Board Colony, Mahabubnagar. …Petitioner No.1/Wife.

and

Kota Damodhar, S/o. K. Venkat Ramulu, aged 36 years, Occ: Private Lecturer, R/o. H.No.2-3- 18, Bhavani Nagar Street, Gadwal, Jogulamba Gadwal District. …Petitioner No.2/Husband.

This Petition is coming on 08.07.2022 before me in the presence of Sri. K. Nagoji @ Nagoji Rao and Sri DK Sathyanarayanji, Counsel for the Petitioners, having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following :

R D E R O

This Family Court Original Petition filed by the Petitioners No.1 and 2 jointly Under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 praying this Court to grant a Decree of Divorce by dissolving the marriage took place between the Petitioners 1 and 2 on 30.07.2017, on mutual consent.

Page No.2 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.2 /2022

2.The brief case of the Petitioners as disclosed from the petition is that the marriage of the Petitioners No.1 and 2 was solemnized on 30.07.2017 at Manasa Garden Function Hall, Amangal Village and

Mandal, as per the Hindu rites and customs and after the marriage, the Petitioners No.1 and 2 lived at the residence of Petitioner No.2 at

Gadwal for a period of three months and again they shifted their family to Hyderabad and lived there for a period of three months and later shifted their family and stayed at Srinivasa Colony,

Mahabubnagar upto 23.01.2019 and the Petitioners lived together for about 1½ year only as wife and husband and out of their wedlock, they have not blessed with any issues and thereafter some differences are arose between them and that the Petitioners No.1 and 2 are living separately for more than two years, as such there is no possibility of reconciliation or re-union between the Petitioners No.1 and 2. The

Petitioners further submitted that the Petitioner No.2 paid an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) by way of Cash to the

Petitioner No.1 towards her permanent alimony before the caste elders and the same is received by the Petitioner No.1 towards her permanent alimony and that there are no cases pending in any other

Court for divorce. Therefore, both the Petitioners have filed the present Petition for decree of divorce by mutual consent.

3.In order to prove the case of the Petitioners, the Petitioners No.1 and 2 examined themselves as PW-1 and PW-2 respectively and Exs.P1 to P3 are marked through PW-1 and Exs.P4 and 5 are marked through

PW-2.

4.Heard the arguments of counsel of both parties and perused the material on record.

5.Basing on the contention of Petitioners, now the point for consideration before this Court is :

Page No.3 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.2 /2022

“ Whether the decree of divorce by mutual consent is

to be granted to Petitioners by dissolving their marriage

as prayed for? ”

6. POINT :

The Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 in their evidence as PWs-1 and 2 respectively reiterated the averments of the petition. Ex.P1 is the original wedding invitation card of the Petitioners No.1 and 2 on behalf of the parents of the Petitioner No.1 and Ex.P4 is the original wedding invitation card of the Petitioners No.1 and 2 on behalf of the parents of the Petitioner No.2; Ex.P2 is the original marriage photograph of the Petitioners No.1 and 2 in wedding dress, shows the marriage of Petitioners and Ex.P3 is the copy of Aadhar card of the

Petitioner No.1 and Ex.P5 is the copy of Aadhar card of the Petitioner

No.2 shows the proof of identity of the Petitioners No.1 and 2. PW.1 testified that as part of the settlement, she received a total sum of

Rs.3,00,000/- from the Petitioner No.2 towards her full and final settlement and for her permanent alimony and further the Petitioner

No.1 undertakes not to claim any maintenance or any property of the

Petitioner No.2 and not to file any criminal and civil cases against the Petitioner No.2 and his family members.

7.During the course of enquiry, both the Petitioners present and both of them voluntarily deposed that their marriage was performed as per Hindu rites and customs, but later due to some misunderstandings between them, they have decided to take decree of divorce by mutual consent. During the course of inquiry, this Court made its best efforts for reconciliation of both parties by explaining them about the effect and consequences of passing the decree of divorce, but both the Petitioners stated that there is no possibility of their reunion in near future.

Page No.4 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.2 /2022

8.In view of the contents of the petition and the testimonies of PWs.

1 and 2 before this Court, the ingredients required U/sec.13-B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are complied with, since both the petitioners are willing to take divorce on mutual consent by dissolving their marriage. The statutory waiting period of six months as required

U/Sec.13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is also elapsed.

During the course of enquiry, this Court also made efforts for re- union of both the Petitioners, but in vain.

9.In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above, this

Court holds that it is just and proper to grant decree of divorce on mutual consent by dissolving the marriage between both the Petitioners

No. 1 and 2. Accordingly, the Point is answered in favour of the

Petitioners No.1 and 2.

10.In the result, the Petition is allowed and accordingly, the decree of divorce is granted on mutual consent by dissolving the marriage took place between the Petitioners No.1 and 2, dated 30.07.2017, with effect from the date of decree.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist directly on the Computer, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court on this the 15 th day of July, 2022.

Judge,

Family Court-cum- III Addl. District and Sessions

Judge, Mahabubnagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PETITIONERS NO.1 AND 2

Y. Ramadevi PW-1 [Petitioner No.1/Wife].

Page No.5 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.2 /2022

PW-2Kota Damodhar [Petitioner No.2/Husband].

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR PETITIONERS NO.1 AND 2

Ex.P1The original wedding invitation card of the Petitioners invited on behalf of the parents of the Petitioner No.1. Ex.P2The original marriage photograph of the Petitioners No.1 and 2 in wedding dress. Ex.P3The xerox copy of Aadhar card of the Petitioner No.1. Ex.P4The original wedding invitation card of the Petitioners invited on behalf of the parents of the Petitioner No.2. Ex.P5The xerox copy of Aadhar card of the Petitioner No.2.

Judge,

Family Court-cum- III Addl. District and Sessions

Judge, Mahabubnagar.

Page No.1 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.12/2022

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT-CUM-III

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (Formerly VIII

Additional District and Sessions Judge) AT MAHABUBNAGAR.

Present: Sri N. Santosh Kumar,

Judge, Family Court-cum-

III Addl.District and Sessions

Judge, Mahabubnagar.

Friday, the 22nd day of July, 2022.

F.C.O.P.No.12 of 2022

Between:

Chikine Shailaja, W/o. Chikine Balaraju, age 34 years, Occ: Contract Operator in Aarogya Sree, presently residing at her parents house H.No.3- 8-82, Ravindranagar, Mahabubnagar Town. …Petitioner No.1/Wife.

and

Chikine Balaraju, S/o. C. Balakistaiah, age 40 years, Occ: Computer Operator in DWMA, Rajapur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. R/o. H.No.3-11-20/F, Veerannapet, Mahabubnagar.

…Petitioner No.2/Husband.

This Petition is coming on 18.07.2022 before me in the presence of Sri S. Nagender Raju, Counsel for the Petitioners, having heard and stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following :

R D E R O

This Family Court Original Petition filed by the Petitioners No.1 and 2 jointly Under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 praying this Court to grant a Decree of Divorce by dissolving their marriage took place between the Petitioners No.1 and 2 on 13.11.2011, on mutual consent.

Page No.2 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.12/2022

2.The brief case of the Petitioners as disclosed from the Petition is that the Petitioner No.1 is the wife and the Petitioner No.2 is the husband and their marriage was solemnized on 13.11.2011 at Sri

Seetha Ramula Kalyana Mantam, Toorpu Kaman at Mahabubnagar

Town as per the Hindu rights and customs and thereafter, the

Petitioner No.1 joined the company of the Petitioner No.2 and said marriage was consummated and they lived happily for a period of few months at Mahabubnagar and blessed with issues. The Petitioners further submitted that after the marriage of the Petitioners, due to disputes arose between them, they approached Women Police Station,

Mahabubnagar and also Sakhi Kendram, Mahabubnagar, but in vain.

Therefore, both the Petitioners have been living separately since the year 2018. The Petitioners further submitted that the Petitioner No.1 filed DVC No.8/2020 against the Petitioner No.2 and others before the JFCM, Mahabubnagar, which was withdrawn and decided to take divorce by mutual consent and that the Petitioner No.2 agreed to return all the belongings of the Petitioner No.1, which were presented at the time of marriage and subsequent to the marriage and it is the final settlement. Therefore, both the Petitioners have filed the present

Petition for decree of divorce by mutual consent.

3.After the registration of the petition, both parties are placed under observation for six months. In the meanwhile, as per the orders of IA No.96/2022 dt:18.07.2022, the waiting period of six months contemplated under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been waived off.

4.In order to prove the case, the Petitioners No.1 and 2 are examined as PW-1 and PW-2 respectively. Exs.P1 to P3 are marked through PW-1 and Ex.P4 is marked through PW-2.

Page No.3 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.12/2022

5.Heard the arguments of counsel of both parties and perused the material on record.

6.Basing on the contention of Petitioners, now the point that would arise for consideration before this Court are:

“ Whether the decree of divorce by mutual consent

is to be granted to Petitioners by dissolving their

marriage ? ”

7. POINT :

PWs.1 and 2 in their testimony reiterated all the averments of the Petition. Ex.P1is the marriage invitation card and Ex.P2 consists of two marriage photographs of Petitioners No.1 and 2 in wedding dress, shows the proof of marriage of Petitioners. Ex.P3 is the copy of

Aadhar Card of Petitioner No.1 and Ex.P4 is the copy of Aadhar card of Petitioner No.2 shows the proof of the identity of the Petitioners

No.1 and 2 respectively. During course of enquiry, both the

Petitioners present and both of them voluntarily deposed that their marriage was performed as per Hindu rites and customs, but later due to some differences between them, they have decided to take decree of divorce by mutual consent.

8.In view of the contents of the petition and the testimonies of PWs.

1 and 2 before this Court, the ingredients required U/sec.13-B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are complied with since the marriage of both parties was taken place on 13.11.2011 and subsequently from 26.09.2018, both the Petitioners have been living separately and that the present petition was filed on 17.03.2022 and that both the petitioners voluntarily willing to take divorce on mutual consent by dissolving their marriage. As per the orders in IA No.96/2022

dt:18.07.2022, the statutory waiting period of six months as

required U/Sec.13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been waived off.

Page No.4 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.12/2022

9.In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above, this

Court holds that it is just and proper to grant decree of divorce on mutual consent by dissolving the marriage between both the Petitioners

No.1 and 2. Accordingly, the Point is answered in favour of the

Petitioners No.1 and 2.

10.In the result, the Petition is allowed and accordingly, the decree of divorce is granted on mutual consent by dissolving the marriage took place between the Petitioners No.1 and 2, dated 13.11.2011, with effect from the date of decree.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist directly on the Computer, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court on this the 22 nd day of July, 2022.

Judge,

Family Court-cum- III Addl. District and Sessions

Judge, Mahabubnagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PETITIONERS NO.1 AND 2

Smt Chikine Shailaja PW-1 [Petitioner No.1/Wife]. PW-2Chikine Balaraju [Petitioner No.2/Husband].

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR PETITIONERS NO.1 AND 2

Ex.P1Marriage invitation card. Ex.P2Two marriage photographs of the Petitioners No.1 and 2. Ex.P3Copy of Aadhar Card of Petitioner No.1. Ex.P4Copy of Aadhar card of Petitioner No.2.

Page No.5 of total 5 pages. Orders in F.C.O.P.No.12/2022

Judge,

Family Court-cum- III Addl. District and Sessions

Judge, Mahabubnagar.

TSFC060007522021

Presented on : 26-10-2021 Registered on : 26-10-2021 Decided on : 27-05-2022 Duration : 0 years, 7 months, 1 days

IN THE COURT OF

Judge Family Court cum III Additional District and Sessions Judge AT

MAHABUBNAGAR ,MAHABOOBNAGAR

F.C.O.P/70/2021

Exhibit No.:

XXXXXXXXXX

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Advocate for : V.Ramaiah Ramu Advocate for : appearing for Junuguntla Meenamma: Advocate appearing for respectively.

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 27-05-2022 )

Petitioner No1 and No2 are absent. In the result, the

petition is allowed and accordingly, the decree of divorce is

granted on mutual consent by dissolving the marriage took place

between the petitioner No1 and No 2,dated 13.02.2015 at

shivalayam temple , Edulapally village of kothur mandal,

mahaboobnagar district with effect from the date of decree.

Date : 27-05-2022 Judge Family Court cum III

Additional District and Sessions Judge

MAHABUBNAGAR

Dictated on :

Transcribed on : checked on : Signed on :

Sd/-

{JUDGE_DESIGNATION_NAME}

MAHABUBNAGAR

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS