THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO FCA No.301 of 2011 Between G. Sudhakar V G. Sulochana THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO FCA No.301 of 2011 Common order : ( Per Sri GM, J ) This appeal is preferred by the appellant-husband against the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court, Kurnool in FCOP No.96 of 2010 dated 31-10- 2011. The appellant preferred OP for grant of divorce by dissolving his marriage with the respondent/wife as under section 13(1)(1a) and (1b) of the Hindu Marriage Act read with Section 7 of the Family Court Act. The relationship of the petitioner and the respondent as husband and wife, having solemnized their marriage on 25.8.2007 as per Hindu Religious Rites and Customs in Devi Paradise Function Hall, Nandyal Check post, Kurnool, is undisputed. They are not blessed with any children out of their wedlock. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner respondent-wife not only subjected the petitioner to cruelty but also deserted him for more than 2 years without any reasonable excuse and so the petitioner is entitled for grant of divorce on both the grounds. The respondent-wife has refuted all the allegations made by the petitioner in the O.P. and contended that she has withdrawn from the society of the petitioner/husband not on her own volition and she was made to leave matrimonial home since she suffered with all sorts of mental and physical harassment demanding for want of additional dowry by the respondent having not satisfied with the dowry already given to him at the time of marriage and so she has resorted to file a criminal case in C.C.No.225 of 2008. In the present case, it has been alleged by the petitioner that he was subjected to mental agony by the respondent-wife because of her quarrelsome nature as she used to pick up unnecessary quarrels on trivial issues and always used to leave to her parent’s house even without his consent and also for filing of criminal case with all false allegations for dowry harassment. Except self serving testimony of P.W.1-petitioner herein absolutely there was no evidence to elicit any such instances as alleged by the petitioner. The petitioner has not examined any other member in his family in this regard. Considering the other aspect as to whether the petitioner has also suffered with desertion by the respondent for a period of more than 2 years and more, it is to be noticed that desertion is always a matter of inference to be drawn from the facts and circumstances of each case. The Court below on adjudication of the evidence came to the conclusion that merely because the petitioner and the respondent are living separately for a period of two years and more is not sufficient to constitute desertion and rightly dismissed the O.P. on both the grounds of desertion and cruelty. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not see any ground to interfere with the said judgment under appeal. The FCA is meritless and is dismissed. No costs. GHULAM MOHAMMED, J NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J Date :28-12-2011 Kk/ THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO FCA No.301 of 2011 28-12-2011