1
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT-CUM-
VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, ANANTAPURAMU.
PRESENT: Smt. T. Haritha
Judge, Family Court-cum-VII Additional District & Sessions Court,
Ananatapuramu.
Friday, this the 03rd day of November, 2023.
F.C.O.P. 214/2022
Between:
U. Mahaboob Peera @ Maboo Peera, S/o Mr. Mastan Vali, age 31 years,
Muslim, Employee, Katrimala Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuramu Dist.
... Petitioner
AND
Smt. Fahima, D/o Khaja Mynuddin, age 28 years, Muslim, residing at No.21,
Venkataramanappa Building, Gangamma Temple Road, Near New SLV School,
Amruthahalli Sahakarnagar Post, Bangalore-92.
... Respondent
This petition came before this court on 31.10.2023 for final hearing in
the presence of Sri R. Yerriswamy, Advocate for the petitioner and of
Sri Ramanjaneya Chowdary, Advocate for the respondent having heard
the learned counsels for the petitioner and respondent and having stood over
for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:
ORDER
1. This is an application filed by the petitioner under section 307 of
Mahammadan Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 for dissolution of his
marriage with the respondent held on 22.01.2017.
2. The brief averments of the petition are as follows:
The marriage of petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on
22.01.2017 at Kanakadasa Function Hall, Gooty Road, Ananthapuramu city in
accordance with Muslim customs and traditions in the presence of relatives,
well wishers and friends of both sides. At the time of marriage, the petitioner
has not received anything from the parents of respondent, but the marriage
expenses were incurred by the parents of respondent. Immediately after the
2
marriage, the respondent joined with the petitioner and the marriage is
consummated. Both of them lived happily only for few months. Thereafter
the respondent started to harass the petitioner by quarreling with him and
his family members without any justifiable cause and the respondent often
used to left the matrimonial house without informing to the petitioner in spite
of that the petitioner tried to take back her with a hope that she will change
her attitude. The respondent is not co-operating in matrimonial life and she
used to harass the petitioner. She always insists the petitioner to shift the
family to Bangalore where her parents are residing but the petitioner did not
accept the same as he has to look after his aged parents and family
members. On that the respondent left the matrimonial house without
informing to the petitioner in the month of December, 2019 and she herself
went to her parents’ house voluntarily. The respondent requested her to join
with him but she refused to join with him and threatened him along with her
parents to shift family to Bangalore. The petitioner convened panchayat in
the presence of elders but the respondent did not heed the advice of elders.
All his efforts to bring back the respondent proved futile. The respondent got
issued a legal notice dated 23.06.2020 demanding the petitioner to put up
separate family at Bangalore otherwise she will prefer criminal case against
him under domestic violence and other Acts. Having no other option the
petitioner the court for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent.
Hence the petition.
3. Respondent filed her counter admitting the marital relationship with
the petition and denied all the remaining allegations made by the petitioner
against her. The respondent submitted that at the time of marriage her
parents gave Rs.2,00,000/- cash and 140 grams gold jewellary as dowry to
the petitioner as demanded. Her parents spent Rs.10,00,000/- to perform her
marriage by selling the landed property at Rapthadu. By the time of
3
marriage, the petitioner was working at Chattisgarh and hence set up the
family in Chattisgarh where he and respondent lived happily for few months.
Thereafter the petitioner used to come to the house after his duties in a
drunken state and started to torture her. Being provked by his parents, the
petitioner used to harass the respondent physically and mentally. He used
to beat her indiscriminately and inhumanly and driven her out from the
matrimonial home which forced the respondent to come down to her parents
house. Even the petitioner did not heed the advice of elders. Further the
respondent learnt that the petitioner developed illicit intimacy with another
woman and used to enjoy with her in the city. The petitioner completely
neglected the respondent by developing the extra marital relationship with
his paramour.
4. The respondent further contended that in the month of October, 2018
the petitioner brought the respondent to his parents home at Katrimala
village of Pamidi mandal and went to Chattisgarh. While the respondent was
stayed in Katrimala village, the parents and sisters of the petitioner harassed
her by picking up quarrel with her on petty issues and they did not care her
needs. The respondent became impregnated in the month of December,
2018 when she was in Chattisgardh. The petitioner did not provide any
medical treatment to her and forcibly got aborted the conception. Thereafter
the petitioner brought the respondent to Bangalore and left her in her parents
home. Later the petitioner informed that he was transferred to Badrachalam
in A.P. State. By the intervention of the elders, the petitioner promised that
he would take back the respondent by securing a house. Accordingly the
respondent went to Badrachalam and joined the petitioner. But there was no
change in the attitude of the petitioner and he continued to harass the
respondent. The petitioner used to come to the house along with his friends
in a drunken state and harass the respondent mentally by picking up quarrel
4
with her. The petitioner left the respondent alone in the house and went to
training for one month. The petitioner used to send his friends to the house
in the night who used to stay entire night in the house on the pretext that the
petitioner deployed them to take care of the respondent. The respondent
spent in a panic situation till the petitioner came back from his training. In
the month of March, 2019, the petitioner took the respondent to her parents
home and went away. Thereafter he did not turn up to take back the
respondent to his home. He completely neglected and refused to maintain
the respondent. The respondent is forced to file a petition in F.C.M.C.
309/2022 on the file of this court for maintenance. The petitioner has not
spent a single nickel for her maintenance. The petitioner came to the court
without clean hands and with ulterior motive. The petition is completely
devoid of merits and hence payed the court to dismiss the petition with costs.
5. Both the petitioner and respondent jointly filed terms of compromise
under Ex.P.4 stating that they both entered into a compromise at the
intervention of elders of both sides for the following terms :
(1) That both petitioner and the respondent agreed for divorce by
dissolving their marriage dt.22.01.2017.
(2) That the respondent received Rs.7,75,000/- towardsd full and
final settlement towards her maintenance and she agreed to
withdraw the F.C.O.P. No.309/2022 which is pending before this
court filed by her.
(3) That there is no coercion or undue influence against both
parties. The petitioner and the respondent voluntarily entered
into compromise, settled the disputes of the case.
(4) That the respondent agreed not to claim right over the estate
of the petitioner and his ancestral property in future.
(5) Both parties agreed not to prefer any appeals against the
orders passed by this court in the event of terms of
compromise of the above case.
5
(6) That today onwards the petitioner and respondent agreed to
live separately without preferring any criminal or civil cases
against each other.
6. The petitioner himself examined as PW.1 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.4.
The repodnent herself examined as RW.1 and no documents marked on her
behalf. Petitioenr and repsodnent’s evidence closed.
7. Heard both and perused the material on record.
8. Now, the points for consideration is:
Whether the marriage between the petitioner and respondent
can be dissolved on mutual consent?
POINT:
9. Both parties admitted their marriage. The petitioner was examined as
PW.1. The respondent was examined as RW.1. The petitioner in his evidence
deposed that himself and respondent are not willing to live together. He
made an offer to the respondent for the divorce and the respondent accepted
for the said proposal. They both decided to take divorce by way of mutual
consent. The respondent/wife in her evidence deposed that her husband
made an offer for divorce. She accepted for the said proposal. They both
decided to take divorce by way of mutual consent.
10. From the evidence of PW.1 and RW.1, it is clear that they both intend to
take divorce as they are not willing to live together. There is no chance for
their reunion. The respondent/wife received the amount of Rs.7,50,000/-
from the petitioner towards full and final settlement and all her claims
against the Respondent/husband. It appears, all the disputes relating to the
marriage was settled between them. Hence, it is a fit case to grant decree of
divorce.
6
11. In the result, the petition is allowed without costs granting decree of
divorce dissolving the marriage between the petitioner and respondent
performed on 22.01.2017. Both parties are entitled for order copy on free of
costs.
Dictated to the Stenographer Gr.I, transcribed by him, corrected and
pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 03rd day of November, 2023.
Sd/- T. Haritha
Judge, Family Court –cum-
VII Addl. District & Sessions Court,
Anantapuramu.
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for
Petitioner:- Respondent:
PW.1 : U. Mahaboob Peera @ Maboo Peera RW.1 Fahima
Exhibits marked on behalf of Petitioner
Ex.P.1 Original Wedding Card.
Ex.P.2 Nikhanama.
Ex.P.3 Photograph of petitioner and respondent.
Ex.P.4 Terms of compromise.
Exhibits marked on behalf of Respondent
-NIL-
Sd/- T. Haritha
Judge, Family Court –cum-
VII Addl. District & Sessions Court,
Anantapuramu.
