HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R. VARMA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA C.M.A.No.3738 OF 2002 DATED: 13.09.2010 Between: Maturi Rama .. Appellant And Maturi Viswanatham .. Respondent JUDGMENT:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B.N.Rao Nalla) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order dated 07.11.2001 made in O.P. No. 3 of 1998 whereby the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bodhan, allowed the petition filed under Section 13(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act by the husband against the wife, by dissolving the marriage and granting divorce. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as “husband” and “wife” The brief facts of the case before the Court below are that the marriage between the wife, who is the appellant herein, and the husband, who is the respondent herein, took place in 1989 at Nizamabad, and two male children (twins) were born to them out of their wed-lock. However, only one survived. It is stated that ever since the marriage, the wife used to be quarrelsome and was not interested in the husband, as such, she would frequently leave the house of the husband without informing him and when she was questioned for her unwarranted behaviour, she used to pick up quarrels and threaten him. With the assistance of her greedy parents and brothers, she started demanding from her husband huge amounts on one or the other reason under threat and pressure. When her husband failed to fulfil her frequent demands, she resorted to approaching the departmental officials of the husband with false complaints making his life miserable. It is alleged that she filed a false complaint to the Women’s Protection Cell, Lakdi-ka-Pool at Hyderabad in February, 1997 making false allegations of dowry demands, etc. and put the husband and his old-aged parents to unnecessary harassment, mental torture and agony. It is stated that the husband was also deserted and deprived of the marital enjoyment with the wife for more than four years continuously. Hence, the husband filed the Original Petition before the Court below seeking dissolution of marriage by grant of divorce. The wife filed counter affidavit inter alia denying the petition averments and stated that she did not go to the Women’s Protection Cell, Lakdi-ka-Pool at Hyderabad and file any complaint against her husband, but some of her relatives, without her knowledge, had gone and complained against her husband in her name, but she was in no way concerned with the said complaint. It is stated that she is ready to join the matrimonial life of her husband. To substantiate his case, the husband got himself examined as PW1 besides examining two others as PWs.2 and 3 and got marked Exs.A1 to A8 on his behalf. The wife got herself examined as RW1 besides examining RW1 and got marked Exs.B1 to B7, on her behalf. The Court below, after considering the pleadings and the material available on record including evidence, both oral and documentary, eventually held that there was adequate ground to grant divorce, and accordingly, allowed the O.P. by granting decree of divorce. Aggrieved by the same, the wife has preferred the present appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant-wife contends that even though the respondent-husband failed to prove the ingredients of Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bodhan erroneously granted divorce, and prays that the order under challenge may be set aside. The learned counsel further submits that the son of the appellant and respondent is studying in a Junior College and the appellant has no means to pay his college fees, as such, he pleads that appropriate directions may be issued to the respondent-husband in this regard. The learned counsel for the respondent-husband submits that the respondent is ready and willing to pay college fee of his son as per the fee schedule. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The respondent-husband has filed an affidavit stating that in view of the decree of divorce granted by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bodhan, and having waited till the statutory period for preferring an appeal against the impugned order was over, and inasmuch as no appeal was filed by the appellant-wife, within the statutory period, he married another woman on 17.02.2001, and out of their wedlock, two female children were born. Both the counsel sought to urge only on the issue of permanent alimony, inasmuch as, there is a consensus between both the parties as regards the decree of divorce passed by the Court below. Therefore, there is no need to delve as to the legality or otherwise of the judgment passed by the Court below so far as granting of divorce is concerned. Now, the only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant-wife is entitled for any maintenance or permanent alimony? In this regard, it is to be seen that the appellant-wife is not claiming maintenance or permanent alimony for her survival. However, she pleads that their son is prosecuting Engineering course in a Junior College, for which considerable amount is required towards fee every year, and she has no means to pay his college fees. Therefore, she prays a direction to be given to the respondent-husband to take care of the educational needs of the son till he completes his Engineering course. Therefore, taking into consideration the educational prospects of the son of the appellant and the respondent and also considering the specific submission made by the learned counsel that the respondent-husband has expressed his willingness to pay the college fee of his son, instead of awarding permanent alimony to the appellant- wife, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the appeal, confirming the judgment and decree of divorce passed by the Court below, with the following directions: “The respondent-husband is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rupees one lakh twenty thousand only) per annum, for four years, to the appellant-wife towards college fee of their son, the 1st instalment shall be paid on or before 30.11.2010 and the ensuing instalments shall be paid on or before 30th June of every succeeding year commencing from 2011 onwards, well in advance so as to facilitate the appellant- wife to follow up the fee schedule without causing any interruption to the studies of their son.” Subject to the above directions, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. No costs. ________________ D.S.R. VARMA, J 13-09-2010 _________________ B.N. RAO NALLA, J bcj