1

BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT-CUM- VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,

ANANTAPURAMU.

PRESENT: Sri. D.Tirumala Rao,

Judge, Family Court-cum-VII Additional District & Sessions Court,

Anantapuramu.

Monday, this, the 10th day of January, 2022

F.C.O.P.249/2021

Between:

Kalasamudram Ramalakshmamma, W/o K.G.Chalapathi, aged about 70 years, Hindu,

dependant, Residing at Flat No.102, kakatiya Residency, Court Road, Anantapuramu.
….. Petitioner

AND
K.G.Chalapathi, S/o K.G.Gangappa, aged about 75 years, Hindu, Cultivation, Residing
at D.Cherlopalli Village, Donnikota Post Nallamada mandal, Anantapuramu District.
... Respondent

This petition came before me on 31-12-2021 for final hearing in the

presence of Sri B.Vijaya Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner and the respondent
remained exparte and having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

1. This is a petition filed under Section 13 (1) (ia)& (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act,
1955 praying this court to dissolve the marriage between the petitioner and the
respondent by way of decree of divorce.

2. The case of the petitioner in a nutshell is that the petitioner is the legally
wedded wife of the respondent. Their marriage was solemnized on 15-02-1970 at
D.Cherlopalli Village hamlet of Donnikota, Nallamada Mandal, Anantapuramu District
as per Hindu rites and customs. At the time of marriage, no wedding cards were
printed and no photos were taken. After the marriage, the petitioner and the
respondent lived together and the marriage was consummated. During their
wedlock, they were blessed with two sons namely K.Kamalakar and K.Madhusudhan
aged about 42 and 39 years respectively and one daughter K.Kamala Devi who is
aged about 50 years. All the children of the petitioner and the respondent were
married and they are residing at different places.
 2

3. The petitioner further submitted that in the year 1990, the petitioner suffered
fracture of her left hand when she fell down in her house and she became physically
handicapped as her left hand is not properly functioning. Since then, the respondent
started harassing the petitioner blaming her that she is physically handicapped and
that she is unfit for matrimonial life. The respondent used to beat the petitioner and
abused her without any cause and subjected her to physical and mental cruelty .
Finally the respondent drove out the petitioner out of the matrimonial home in 1991.
In spite of number of panchayaths, the respondent refused to take the petitioner
back to the matrimonial home and to lead marital life with her. The respondent had
completely deserted the petitioner for a continuous period over 30 years since,
1991.

4. The petitioner also submitted that the daughter of the petitioner was given in
marriage to the younger brother of the petitioner. Since 1991, the petitioner has
been residing along with her daughter. There is no chance for the petitioner and the
respondent to live together. Hence, she filed the present petition.

5. Respondent remained exparte.

6. To prove the case of the petitioner herein, the petitioner himself was
examined as PW1 and got marked Exs. A1 & A2. Ex.A1 is joint photograph of the
petitioner and the respondent. Ex.A2 is nativity and residence certificate of
petitioner issued by Tahsildar, Anantapuramu. To support the case of the
petitioner her younger brother was examined as PW2.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. I have perused the
material available on record .

8. Now the points for consideration are:

1). Whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief of divorce as prayed for?

2) To what relief?

9. POINT:1

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of
the respondent. Their marriage was solemnized on 15-02-1970 at D.Cherlopalli
Village hamlet of Donnikota, Nallamada Mandal, Anantapuramu District as per Hindu
rites and customs. After the marriage, the petitioner and the respondent lived
together and their marriage was consummated. During their wedlock, they were
blessed with three children. All the children of them got married and they are
residing at different places.
 3
10. To substantiate the case of the petitioner herein, the petitioner herself was
examined as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 & A2. PW2 is the bother of the PW1 who
corroborated the case of the petitioner.

11. The respondent did not contest the case of the petitioner and remained
exparte.

12. Basing on the evidence of PWs1 to 2, it is established that the respondent left
the petitioner in 1991. There is no justification and reason from the respondent side
as to why he had left the conjugal life with the petitioner. This prolonged agony of
the petitioner in losing the conjugal life with the respondent amounts to mental
cruelty on the part of the respondent apart from permanent desertion of the
petitioner by the respondent. So therefore, it is the considered opinion of this court
that the petitioner established both cruelty and desertion by the respondent and she
also established that she has been staying at her daughter’s house since 1991 as
such she is entitled for divorce as prayed for. Accordingly, this point is answered.

In the result, the petition is allowed and the marriage between the petitioner
and the respondent solemnized on 15-02-1970 is hereby dissolved by way of decree.
There shall be no order as to costs.

Directly typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr.III, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 10 th day of January, 2022.

Judge, Family Court –cum-

VII Addl. District & Sessions Court,
Ananthapuramu.

Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for
Petitioner:- Respondent:
PW1:K.Ramalakshmamma -None-
PW2:B.Ramakrishnaiah
Exhibits marked on behalf of Petitioner

Ex.A1: Joint photograph of the petitioner and the respondent.

Ex.A2: Nativity and residence certificate of the petitioner issued by Tahsildar,
Anantapuramu.
Exhibits marked on behalf of Respondent
-NIL-

Judge, Family Court –cum-

VII Addl. District & Sessions Court,
Ananthapuramu.