IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA C.M.A. No.1199 of 2003 Between: Chennareddy Kamalakar ..... PETITIONER/APPELLANT AND Chennareddy Krishnakumari .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA C.M.A. No.1199 of 2003 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) The appellant is the husband of the respondent, who filed the H.M.O.P.60/1999 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore seeking divorce under Sec.13(1)(1a) and (1b) of Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The said H.M.O.P. was dismissed by order dated 04.02.2003, against which this appeal is filed. 2. The appellant/husband filed CMP.1593/2005 in this appeal praying to receive the certified copy of the judgment dated 01.04.2004 in CC.755/2000 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First class (Mobile Court), Nellore and to mark it as an exhibit, stating that the said criminal case filed at the instance of the respondent/wife against the appellant/husband and his parents under Sec.498-A of iPC and under Secs.3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was dismissed. It is stated that in order to prove the cruel attitude on the part of the respondent/wife the appellant/husband filed the certified copy of the judgment in the above said criminal case. 3. It is the case of the appellant/husband that the respondent/wife immediately after the marriage on 24.10.1998 joined him and both of them lived together for about one month and thereafter, the respondent/wife started insisting the appellant/husband to put up a separate family as he was having old parents, but the appellant/husband refused the request of the respondent/wife. On his refusal to set up a separate family, on 08.02.1997 the respondent/wife left the company of the appellant/husband along with her belongings. Despite his repeated requests the respondent/wife did not join the company of the appellant/husband. 4. It is stated that as the respondent/wife herself voluntarily left his company, the appellant/husband filed H.M.O.P.86/1997 on the file of Senior Civil Judge,Nellore under Sec.9 of Hindu Marriage Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights, but the respondent/wife never joined his company. On the other hand, the respondent/wife filed the aforesaid criminal case against him and his parents, which was ended in acquittal. It is stated that the respondent/wife also filed a maintenance case which was allowed granting maintenance @Rs.500/- per month, and prior to that the appellant/husband used to pay maintenance @Rs.300/- per month as per the interim order of the Court below. 5. It is the case of the respondent/wife that she never deserted the appellant/husband and not committed any cruel acts against the appellant/husband, and on the other hand, the appellant/husband himself deserted her and did not allow her to join his company even after allowing the H.M.O.P.86/1997 filed by the appellant/husband for restitution of conjugal rights. 6. Except the evidence of husband and wife there is no other evidence corroborating their evidence. Therefore, it cannot be just and proper to decide the controversy based on the sole self-serving testimony of either side. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to set aside the judgment under appeal and remit the matter back to the trial Court with a request to dispose of the same afresh, giving opportunity of being heard to both parties and lead further evidence on either side in support of their respective contentions. 8. The CMA is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J _____________________ B.N.RAO NALLA,J Dated: 07.04.2010 Dsr