THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA C.M.A.No. 3728 of 2002 JUDGMENT: (Hon’ble Sri Justice B.N.Rao Nalla) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by wife aggrieved by the order dated 19.11.2002 in O.P.No.487 of 2001 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad, whereunder and whereby the said O.P. filed by her for dissolution of the marriage under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’), was dismissed. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter be referred to as ‘appellant’ and ‘respondent’ as arrayed in this C.M.A. 3. It is the case of the appellant that marriage between her and the respondent was solemnised on 10.3.1995 as per Hindu rites and customs. At the time of marriage, a sum of Rs.45,000/-, 10 tolas of gold, 100 tolas of silver and other household articles, such as colour television, almirahs, cots etc. were presented by the parents of appellant. After the marriage, the respondent at the instigation of his parents started demanding additional dowry of Rs.25,000/- from her father and harassing the appellant to that effect. The respondent and his parents falsely represented to the appellant and her parents that the respondent is a Government employee, but in reality he is unemployed. When the appellant questioned about the false representation, she was reprimanded by the respondent and his parents stating that she should not bother about the employment of the respondent. She tolerated the harassment mated out to her by the respondent expecting that he would change his attitude in future. The appellant is an employee. The respondent used to snatch her salary and spend for his vices. The appellant used to depend on her father to meet the household expenditure. When the respondent was questioned about his frequent absence in the house, he stated that since their residence was shifted near to his in-laws house, he does not want to come. Then the appellant on the advice of the well- wishers shifted their residence near to the house of the respondent’s parents. Even then, the respondent did not come to matrimonial home. On one occasion, the respondent made futile attempt to kill the appellant by pushing her from the 3rd floor of the house. The respondent threatened the appellant that unless she prepared to give her salary to him, he would not allow her to stay with him. At that time, the appellant was 3 months pregnant. Vexed with the attitude of the respondent, the appellant went to her parents’ house. Then, she gave birth to a female child and the same was informed to the respondent, but he did not turn up. In the year 1997, she gave birth to a male child, but due to cardiac problems, he expired. The respondent got issued a legal notice with false allegations against the appellant and called upon her to join him. The appellant made attempts to join the company of the respondent for the sake of marital, but in vain. Since the harassment and cruelty meted out to her by the respondent and his parents was intolerable, she filed a complaint before the XXII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and the same is pending. 4. On the other hand, the respondent denied the allegations made by the appellant except those which are specifically admitted to. It is stated that after the marriage, he and the appellant stayed separately in the house of Smt.Shanta. After filing of criminal case by the appellant under Section 498-A IPC, she along with her father and anti- social elements came to their residence and taken away all the items by breaking open the lock. The gold given by the respondent as well as the parents’ of the appellant in the marriage is in the custody of the appellant. He is working as a Carpenter under a private contractor and was drawing a salary of Rs.3,000/- per month. From the beginning of the marriage, the appellant is neither affectionate nor cordial with the respondent and she was frequently leaving the house of the respondent and going to her parents’ house without any reason. At the instigation of appellant’s parents, they shifted their residence to Nethajinagar near to the house of her parents. The appellant never cooked food and asked the respondent to wash his clothes and always used to insult him in front of his family members. As he is uneducated person and is not gainfully employed she used to abuse him in filthy language. Not able to bear with the harassment mated out by the appellant, the respondent came to back to his parents’ house. But on the intervention of the elders, they started living in the house of Smt.Shanta. 5. The respondent never harassed the appellant at any point of time and in fact, he is ready to take back the appellant so as to lead happy marital life. The respondent is affectionate towards the appellant. The appellant and her parents are not allowing the respondent to see his child since two years from the filing of the counter. Since the appellant has a Government job, she does not give minimum respect to the respondent. In spite of a request made by the respondent to cooperate with him, the appellant has continued her attitude under the influence of her parents and leave the house frequently without his permission. The respondent went several times to the house of the appellant to take her back but she refused to come. The respondent stated that when both the appellant and the respondent are doing job and earning, question of demanding additional dowry by the respondent does not arise. The appellant has not specifically mentioned what type of harassment she was subjected to. 6. The respondent stated that the house, where they both were staying, is not having a third floor and as such the allegation of the appellant that he attempted to do away with her life by pushing her from the third floor of the house is false. The respondent stated that in the month of September,1999, the appellant herself left the company of the respondent without his permission even though she was three months pregnant at that time. Thereafter, the respondent made several efforts to take her back to lead marital life, but in vain. The appellant was giving her salary to her parents. In spite of all her misdeeds, the respondent requested the appellant to join his company and have a conjugal life and to that effect, he got issued notices to the appellant, but she did not turn up. 7. Basing on the pleadings of both parties, the court below framed the following points for consideration: “i.Whether the petitioner (appellant herein) is entitled for divorce? ii. Whether the petitioner established the cruelty by the respondent and his parents towards her?” 8. On behalf of the appellant, she herself was examined as PW.1 and Exs.P.1 and P.2 were marked. On behalf of the respondent, apart from himself examining as PW.1, three others (including his father) were examined as RWs 1 to 4. 9. The court below after taking into consideration both oral and documentary brought on record as well as factual and legal aspects of the matter, dismissed the O.P. on the ground that the appellant has not established the cruelty meted out to her by the respondent. 10. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the point that arises for consideration before this court is whether the appellant has fulfilled the ingredients of the cruelty as contemplated under the Act to dissolve the marriage between her and the respondent? 11. The appellant was examined as PW.1 and in her evidence she reiterated what all she has stated in her petition. In her-cross examination, she denied a suggestion that respondent demanded additional dowry of Rs.25,000/- at the instigation of his parents. She stated that her parents had enquired about the employment of the respondent. She stated that she had cordial relations with her in-laws. She admitted that she left the house in September,1999 without informing her husband and at that time she was 3 months pregnant. She admitted that the house they stayed was of three storied building. She admitted that at the time of initiating proceedings under Section 498-A IPC, her in-laws were away by one lane from her house. She admitted that she has not gone to her husband’s place nor has she shown her child to him. She further admitted that she did not give any information about the birth of female child. 12. The respondent was examined as RW.1 and in his evidence he also reiterated what all he has stated in his counter to the petition. He stated that he is doing carpentry work and drawing a salary of Rs.3,000/- per month and he never said to the parents of the appellant that he was a Government servant. He further stated that he is ready to live with the appellant. In his cross-examination, he denied a suggestion that at the time of marriage, the parents of the appellant gave Rs.45,000/- cash, 10 tolas gold, 100 tolas of silver and household articles. He stated that at the time of marriage, the parents of the appellant gave only Rs.10,000/-. He stated that when he went to see his male child, he was manhandled by the people of appellant. He stated that at the instance of the appellant, they shifted the residence nearer to the appellant’s parents’ house. He further stated that he never demanded additional dowry of Rs.25,000/- for purchase of vehicle. 13. RW.2, who is landlady of the house at Upperbasthi, stated in her evidence that after the marriage the appellant and the respondent along with his parents stayed as tenants in her house. After sometime, they started living in a separate portion in the same house. She stated that the appellant was always fighting with the respondent and used to abuse him in filthy language and frequently left to her parents’ house and did not turn up for months together. She further stated that one day, the appellant and her parents took away all the household articles by breaking open the lock in spite of her objection. She stated that the appellant is adamant in nature and the respondent is an innocent person. In her cross-examination, she stated that she knows the respondent and his parents since 15 to 16 years and they are her tenants. She denied a suggestion that at the time of marriage, the parents of the appellant gave Rs.45,000/-, 10 tolas of gold, 100 tolas of silver and household articles. She stated that they gave a cash of Rs.10,000/-. She stated that during the marriage talks, the respondent or his parents did not represent to the appellant or to her parents that he is doing Government job. She denied a suggestion that the appellant left the society of the respondent due to harassment meted out by the respondent and his parents. 14. RW.3 is father of the respondent. He stated that after the marriage appellant and respondent lived together happily for few days. Thereafter, the appellant started quarrelling on trivial issues. The appellant used to frequently go to her parents’ house and never turned up. The parents of the appellant instigated her to harass the respondent so as to live separately from the parents of the respondent. The appellant’s parents’ gave Rs.10,000/- at the time of marriage. The behaviour of the appellant towards him and his wife is very rude. She always used to leave to her parents’ house. He further stated that the respondent loves the appellant and his child very much and ready to lead a happy marital life. The appellant left the company of the respondent in September,1999 without any intimation and at that time she was 3 months pregnant. The appellant did not inform them about the birth of child. In his cross-examination he stated that he never said that his son-respondent is a Government servant. He denied a suggestion that the appellant and her parents gave Rs.45,000/- cash, 10 tolas of gold, 100 tolas of silver and household articles like television, almairah in the marriage. He denied a suggestion that he demanded additional dowry from the appellant. He also denied a suggestion that because of their harassment, the appellant started living separately and that his son used to beat her to extract her earnings. 15. RW.4 is the co-brother of the respondent’s father. He stated that he was present at the time of marriage. He stated that at the time of marriage, the parents of the appellant were informed that the respondent is working as Carpenter. He stated that the appellant used to leave the house of the respondent frequently and stay at her parents’ place for months together. He stated that the appellant was harassing the respondent by abusing in filthy language. In his cross- examination he denied a suggestion that the appellant gave Rs.45,000/-, 10 tolas of gold and 100 tolas of silver. 16. Having regard to the evidence brought on record by both the parties, it is seen that the appellant was examined as PW.1. In her evidence, she stated that at the time of marriage talks, the respondent and his parents falsely represented that the respondent is a Government employee; that her parents gave Rs.45,000/- cash , 10 tolas of gold and 100 tolas of silver along with household articles at the time of marriage; that after the marriage she was subjected to harassment by the respondent and her parents to get additional dowry of Rs.25,000/-; that respondent was taking away her salary; that respondent attempted to do away with her life by pushing her from the third floor of the house and that these acts would amount to cruelty. 16. But, it is pertinent to note that except her sole testimony, there is no other evidence on record to substantiate her claim. Even she did not choose to examine her parents. On the other hand, apart from respondent himself examining as RW.1, he got examined RW 2, RW.3 (his father) and RW.4. A perusal of the entire evidence adduced on behalf of both sides, it cannot be said that the appellant was subjected to cruelty at the hands of the respondent or his parents. Further, the pleadings made in the petition and the evidence adduced to that effect by the appellant as PW.1 do not attract the ingredients of cruelty as contemplated under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Act. Section 13(1) (ia) of the Act reads as under: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 17. Therefore, we do not find any irregularity or illegality in the impugned order dated 19.11.2002 passed in O.P.No.487 of 2001 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad. 18. In the result, the C.M.A. is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH,J ______________ B.N.RAO NALLA, J -04-2010 Stp