HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.3212 of 2000 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard both sides. This appeal filed by the wife is against the order and decree in O.P.No.544 of 1995 dated 20/07/2000 on the file of the Court of the District Judge, Khammam, dismissing an application purported to have been filed by her under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act (for brevity ‘the Act’), seeking divorce. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the parties were married in the year 1979 and they were blessed with a son and daughter. Thereafter, having regard to certain differences and disputes arising between the parties, it has led to the present proceedings. The main case on which the present petition has been filed by the appellant is about the cruelty as well apart from the other allegations as made. The said application is contested by the respondent herein denying the entire allegations. The details of which are not necessary having regard to the orders which would be passed in this appeal. After framing the points for consideration, the trial Court proceeded with the trial of the case where both sides examined witnesses and the appellant marked certain documents but no documents were marked on behalf of the respondent. After considering the said evidence and material on record, the Court below dismissed the application mainly on the reason that the ground of cruelty is not available under Section 10 of the Act, and therefore, the application itself is not maintainable. Hence, the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that having regard to the Full Bench decision of this Court in Youth Welfare Association v. Union of India[1], and also the subsequent amendments which have been brought forward to the very provisions of the Act, the approach of the Court below is not correct and the said decision is also not brought to the notice of the Court below. Though on facts learned counsel for the respondent sought to repel, however, in regard to the aforesaid submissions about the principles laid down by the Full Bench and also the legislative amendment, there is no dispute. Having considered the aforesaid submissions and since the said decision and legislation as it later amended has not come up for consideration and not brought before the Court below, we are of the view that the matter requires fresh consideration in view of the Full Bench decision and as well as the effect of the legislative amendment. In the circumstances, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. The order and decree in O.P.No.544 of 1995 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Court below for fresh disposal in accordance with law after giving notice and opportunity to both sides. No order as to costs. _________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J ___________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 10th February, 2010 SKM [1] 1996 (4) ALT 1138 (FB)