THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.3507 OF 2002 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) The appellant-husband filed this appeal under Section 28 (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 {“the Act” for brevity}, aggrieved by the order dated 07.09.2001 in O.P.No.67 of 1999 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ananthapur, in dismissing the petition filed under Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage. The fact, in brief, which are necessary for disposal of this appeal, are that the marriage of the appellant and the respondent-wife held on 11.04.1991 and they were blessed with two sons out of the wedlock. Thereafter, certain disputes cropped up between the parties due to which the respondent-wife left the company of the appellant-husband and living with her parents. The respondent-wife filed M.C.No.25 of 1997 and also gave a police complaint under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 {IPC}, which ended in conviction in Sessions Case No.454 of 1998. The attempts for mediation did not succeed and therefore, the present O.P. was filed for divorce on the grounds of mental agony and cruelty. The respondent-wife resisted the said O.P. by denying the entire allegations. It was further stated that the appellant-husband had addicted to bad habits and married one Ramanamma of Chigicherla Village in January 1986 and started harassing her by demanding dowry. So, she has to take recourse claiming maintenance and also filed a complaint under Section 498-A IPC. On these allegations, the Court below, after framing points for consideration, proceeded with the trial, where P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined on behalf of the appellant and R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined on behalf of the respondent. Neither side adduced documentary evidence. While taking into consideration the fact that the appellant was convicted in S.C.No.454 of 1998 of the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC and following the principles laid down in V.J.kumar v. V.Radhika[1], the Court below did not find favour with the request of the appellant-husband and dismissed the petition. Hence, the appeal. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as against the very same judgment where under he was convicted of the offence punishable under Section 498- A IPC in S.C.No.454 of 1998, an appeal was filed in Crl.A.No.42 of 2000. The said appeal was allowed on 26.06.2002 by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Anantapur. Since the O.P. was dismissed on the said ground of conviction, the matter needs to be reconsidered on various other aspects as set forth by both the sides. Admittedly, the Court below has not gone into other aspects, except that of the conviction of the appellant. Hence, we are of the view that the matter requires reconsideration and to be disposed of in accordance with law. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the order dated 07.09.2001 in O.P.No.67 of 1999 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Anantapur, is set aside. Consequently, the matter is remanded to the Court below for fresh disposal in accordance with law. It is also left open to both the parties to lead fresh evidence, if they chose to do so. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) ___________________ (G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J) 10th February 2009 RRB [1] 1996 (6) ALT 608