Smt.t. Suhasini

1

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT :: SMT. T.SUHASINI,

Senior Civil Judge, Medak.

FAC: Senior Civil Judge, Siddipet.

Tuesday, the 1 ?fh day of August, 2021.

H.M.O.P.No. 9 OF 2020

Between: -

Kamuni Naresh, S/o.Rajaiah, aged : 30 years, 0cc : Manager in Solar Power Plant, R/o. H.No.4-75/4, Nehru Nagar, Dubbak Town and Mandal, Siddipet District.

... Petitioner

AND

Kamuni Vindya @ Gundeti Preethi, W/o. Kamuni Naresh, D/o. Venkatesh, aged : 25 years, 0cc : Housewife, R/o. 4-75/4, Nehru Nagar, Dubbak Town and Mandal, Siddipet District. Now Clo. Saraswathi Uniforms, New Bus-stand, Opp: Mandal Office, Metpally Town and Mandal, Jagithyal District.

... Respondent

This petition is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri s. Laxminarayana, Counsel for Petitioner and Respondent remained ex parte, upon perusing material papers on record, upon hearing arguments on behalf of petitioner, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court made the following :-

-: 0 RD ER:-

1. This is a petition filed by the Petitioner/husband against the

Respondent/wife under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, praying the

Court to pass a decree for restitution of conjugal rights between

Petitioner/husband and Respondent/wife.

2 (i). The case of the petitioner as could be seen from the petition avermen in- 2 . II edded w·1fe of petitioner and their marr·, brief is that the respondent ts lega Y w a~~ of respondent at Viietha was solemnized on 10-05-2019 at parent's house . · Metpally Village Jagithyal District as per the School lbrahtmpatnam Crossing, • rites and customs of Hindu religion in the presence of friends, relatives and family members. At the time of marriage, parents of respondent give3n house hold articles and gold ornaments to the respondent. The gold ornaments now with the respondent. The petitioner not taken any dowry from the respondent.

(ii). It is further averred that after simonizing the marriage, the respondent joined the society of petitioner in matrimonial home. After the marriage of petitioner with respondent, the respondent lived happily for a period of three months only. It is further contended that the respondent harassed to the petitioner mentally and physically. After that the respondent left the society of petitioner without any reason or without any intimation to the petitioner.

(iii). It is further averred that the petitioner approached to the respondent and his family members for join with the society of the petitioner, at that time panchayat held in between the caste elders of the petitioner and respondent.

The caste elders also advised to the respondent to live marital life happily with the petitioner. After that the respondent joined with the society of the petitioner.

It is further submitted that the respondent joining to the society of the petitioner the respondent started harassment that to separate from the joint family of the petitioner and harassed to the mother of petitioner and brother.

But the petitioner bared the harassment of the respondent. Respondent left the society of petitioner on 22-11-2019 taking that the gold ornaments are kept in

her parents house. The petitioner approached thFespondent on

3 20-12-2019 and requested to come and join the society of petitioner but the respondent refused for the same. Hence, the petition.

3. The respondent did not appeared before this court even after receiving the notice. No representation reported on 26-07-2021 and she was remained ex parte.

4. Heard the counsel for petitioner and perused the record.

5. The point that arises for det~rmination is :- "Whether the petitioner is entitled for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights and to direct the Respondent/wife to join the society of petitioner/husband to lead conjugal life ?" .e.Qlo1 :-

6. In support of his case, the petitioner filed his chief-examination affidavit as

PWl and got marked Ex.Pl document. Ex.Pl is the wedding card of the petitioner and respondent along with photo.

7. PWl in his chief-examination affidavit reiterated more or less the petition averments. There is no dispute with regard to the marriage held on 10-05-2019 between PWl and respondent. After the marriage with respondent the respondent lived happily for a. period of three months only. In the period of three months also, the respondent harassed to the petitioner mentally and physically.

After that the respondent left the society of petitioner without any reason or without any intimation to the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner

approached to the respondent and his family members tor j ~

I 4 h h Id in between the case elders of petitioner . petitioner. At that time panchayat e 2019 stating· that the gold ornaments are kept in her and respondent. On 22-11- the house o.f .. P. arents and come with gold ornaments. parents hence she go to .

On the same information the responden wen °

t• t t her parents house and to come back to the matrimonial home. On 20-12-2019 petitioner requeSted to come and join to the society of petitioner but the respondent refused for the same· As such, he prayed to grant decree of restitution of conjugal rights.

Admittedly to disprove the above allegations made by PWl, the 8.

respondent didn't appear before the Court and she remained exparte. It clearly shows that the respondent has no objeGtion to allow the petition.

It is the bounden duty of every wife to lead the conjugal life with her 9.

husband and to look after the welfare of her children. The silence on the part of the respondent, she remained exparte and that the respondent left the conjugal society of petitioner and residing with her parents without valid reasons and without reasonable excuse or valid grounds and the unchallenged evidence of

PWl coupled with Ex.Pl, the marriage between PWl and respondent is still in subsistence, the petitioner/PW! is entitled for decree for restitution of conjugal rights and to direct the Respondent/wife to join the society of petitioner to lead conjugal life.

For the reasons set forth in the preceding paragraphs, I am of the 10.

considered view that the petitioner/PW! is entitled for the relief. Thus, the point is

~

answered accordingly.

5

11. In the result, the petition is allowed and the respondent/wife is directed to join the society of the petitioner and lead conjugal life. No costs.

Typed to my dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by (11e in open

court on this the 1 rh day of August, 2021. -

Senior C vii Judge, Medak. FAC : Senior Civil Judge, Siddipet.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR RESPONDENT

FOR PETITIONER

- None - PWl - Kamuni Naresh

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PETITIONER

Ex.Pl :Wedding card of the petitioner and respondent along with photo.

FOR RESPONDENT

- Nil -

Senior Civil Judge, Medak.

FAC : Senior Civil Judge, Siddipet.

.1.

IN THE COURf OF THE SENIOB. CIVIL JUDGE AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT : SMT. T. SUHASINI.

SENIOR CML JUDGE, MEDAK.

FAC: SENIOR CML JUDGE, SIDDIPET

TUESDAY, THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

O.P. N0.22 OF 2020

Between:

Anchanagiri @ Vangapalli Kavyasree @ Anusha, W/o. Anchanagiri Rajasheka1-, Age: 26 yrs, 0cc: Private Job, Rio. H.No.3-32/A, hanuman Nagar, Siddipet Town and District.

. .... Petitioner

AND

Anchanagiri Rajashekar, S/o. Srinivas, Age 27 yrs, 0cc: Car Mechanic, Rio. H.No.12-3-100/23/1, Khadarpura Street, Siddipet Town and District.

. .. Respondent

This petition comir.g before me for fmal hearing in the presence of Sri A. Rajeshwar Reddy, Counsel for petitioner, while respondent remained ex parte upon perusing the material on record, upon hearing the arguments of counsel for petitioner and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, this court delivered the following:-

ORDER

1. This is a petition for divorce by wife under Section 13 (1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

2. The case of the petitioner in brief as per the petition is as follows:

According to the petitioner that her marriage with the respondent took place on 16-03-2015 as per Hindu rites and caste customs and

'

they lived together for 1 year, after that the respo

Contd ... 2 '1 "-'

ff .q

I ..... "tr

e ~

2 "G . ..., " ( Q:,

~ t-8.

§ ~ !$ ~ -~V)-:0 ~ Q. cc,· cruelty by ill-treating her as not up to her expectations his status was and to fulfill her desires. It is further su nu b ·tted that respondent started for demanding dowry· two or three occasions, . th petitioner's parents 0 n e adjusted some amount to the respondent. he used that amount for his lavish habits. again he demanded the petitioner 0 . . t bring money from her parent's house but the parent's of the petitioner e . - xpressed their inability to give again and again for add1tiona . . 1 d t the respondent, for that owry 0 reason respondent tortured the petitioner mentally and physically. It is submitted that the re~pondent addicted to all bad habits like drinking and playing cards and he is not giving any conjugal satisfaction to the petitioner. The respondent abusing the petitioner irl filthy language

before the relatives and neighbors~ w"ithout any reason. The petitioner

parents complained the matter Lefore the caste elders and relatives and held panchayats number of times. In spite of several efforts, mediations there is no change in his attitude. On 05-08-2019 the respondent came in an intoxication condition and beat the petitioner with blue and black and necked out from his house as such she is living at her parent's house at Siddipet. On 20-09-2019 the petitioner and her parents went to the house of the respondent and requested him ' to receive the petitioner to his conjugal society but the respondent bluntly refused to lead the conjugal life with the petitioner.

3. The respondent did not appeared before this court even after receiving the notice. No representation on his behalf. On 08-02-2021 and he was remained ex parte.

4. The petitioner got examined himself as PWl in support of her case

~

• (Contd ... 3) - 3

Heard learned counsel for petitioner who submitted that the petitioner proved her case.

6. The point for determination is whether the petitioner is entitled to decree of divorce as prayed for?

POINT:

7. PWl deposed in support of her allegations mentioned in the petition and her evidence is un-rebutted as the respondent failed to appear before this court and did not choose to cross examine by contesting this petition. Hence, the case of the petitioner is proved.

Hence, the court holds that the petitioner is entitled for divorce.

The point is answered accordingly.

8. In the result, the petition is allowed and there shall be a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage of the petitioner and respondent held on 16-03-2015. No costs.

Dictated to Typist, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in '

the open court on this the 1 Th day of August, 2021.

SENIO L JUDGE,

MEDAK FAC:SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

APPENDIX OF' EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PETITIONER SIDE

PWl Anchanagiri @Vangapalli Kavyasree @Anusha

RESPONDENT SIDE

--None--

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR PETITIONER

' Ex.Pl is the wedding card of the petitioner and respondent.

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR RESPONDENT

--Nil--

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MEDAK. FAC:SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.