The High Court · 2025

Sri Mirza Nisar Ahmed Baig Counsel for the Respondent : Sri Azim Parbatani The Court delivered the foltowing: ,..t THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE IC LAKSHMAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY A.S.No.52l o12002 09rh December,2025 Between: Sri Noor Ali Ghadia. Smt. Laila. AND . . . Petitioner . . . Respondent JUDGMENT: (Per Honourable Sri Justice K.Lakshman) Heard Ms. Mujeeb Fathima, leamed counsel representing Sri Mirza Nisar Ahmed Baig, learned counsel for the appellant/defendant/husband. In the preJunch session when the matter is called, colleague of Sri Azim Parbatani, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintifflwife sought for pass over but post lunch session, there is no representation.

2. This appeal is of the year 2002. We have accommodated both the counsels for eight (08) times.

3. We have perused the record.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the Judgment dated 31.12.2001 in O.S.No.207 of 1997, passed by the 2 :; learned Judge, Family Court, at Hyderabad, the appellant/husband preferred the present appeal.

5. Respondent/wife filed the aforesaid suit against the appellant/trusband seeking dissolution of marriage. Their marriage was performed on 29.09.1990 as per Muslim Marriage Act, 1939. According to the respondent/wife, the said the marriage was consummated. The appellant/husband has taken the respondent/wife to his house at Adilabad, where his parents were residing. There the appellant/husband and his relatives, parents and sisters started ill-treating her. He was running an electrical goods business at Hyderabad by staying there and the respondent/wife also used to make short visits along with the appellant/husband herein to Adilabad. At the instance of his parents and sisters, the appellant/husband used to force the respondent/wife to bring huge amounts from her parents. They started teasing and harassing her both physically and mentally. They have demanded two flats owned by her parents and 50Yo of partnership in the business of her father and brothers without any monetary investments. \- \r, 3 The appellant/husband beat her mercilessly. He has not even allowed her to visit parents' house at Chirag Ali lane at Hyderabad. He has not even allowed her to make call to her parents. Her parents are educated and hail from respectable family. They did not tolerate the said ill-treatment of the appellant/husband and his family members.

6. It is further alleged that due to the said continuous harassment by the appellant/husband, his parents and sisters, she was not in a position to lead marital [ife. Therefore, she has issued a notice dated 12.11.1997 to the appellant/trusband demanding divorce. Thereafter, she has filed the aforesaid suit seeking dissolution of marriage.

7. The appellant/husband filed the written statement denying the'said allegations made by the respondent/wife.

8. To prove the said cruelty, the respondent/wife examined herself as PWI and filed Exs.Al to A7 documents. To disprove the said allegations and cruelty, the 4 t- \__.-.yFt appellant/husband examined himself as DWl and filed Exs.B1 to B51 documents. g. On consideration of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, vide impugned Judgment dated 13.12.2001, the learned Judge, Family Court granted decree of divorce dissolving the marriage of the appellant/husband with the respondent/wife performed on 29.09.1 990.

10. As discussed supra, it is the respondent/wife, who filed the aforesaid suit seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. Therefore, she has to plead and prove the said cruelty.

11. As discussed supra, the respondent/wife had pleaded aforesaid crgel acts against the appellant/husband herein. To prove the same, the respondent/wife had examined herself as pwl and she filed Ex.Al - Judgment in c.c.No.380 of 1994, Ex.A2 - notice dated 12.11.t997 , Ex.A4 - contract marriage certificate, Ex.A5 - Judgment in Crl.A.No.1l6 of 1998 dated 22.11.2001, Ex.A6 - summons dated 25-03-1997, Ex.A7 - -/- | Letter, whereas, the appellant/defendant filed several 5 documents including copy of the documents, Ex.B36 - letter by the conciliation and arbitration board etc. He has also filed Ex.B5l - certified copy of the complaint in C.C.No.l02 of

1996. The aforesaid record would reveal that despite making efforts by the conciliation and arbitration board, there was no possibility of the parties' reunion. On perusal of the plaint and written statement would reveal that there were no issues out of their wed-lock. On consideration of the said evidence only, vide impugned Judgment dated 31.12.2001, the learned Judge, Family Court granted decree of divorce dissolving marriage of the appellant/husband with the respondenUwife.

12. Vide impugned order dated 20.03.2002, this Court granted interim injunction.

13. As rightly observed by the learned Judge, Family Court that the disputes between the parties arose prior to the year 1994 and a case wzrs registered against the appellant/husband herein in C.C.No.380 of 1994 on the complaint lodged by the respondenUwife. A case in Crime No.296 of 1994 was also s:B!' 6 registered against the appellant/trusband herein. Thus, there are strained relations between appellant and respondent.

14. As discussed supra, the respondent/wife made specific allegation that the appellant/husband, his parents and sisters harassed her both physically and mentally. Despite the same, the appellant/husband did not examine his parents and sisters to disprove the same.

15. A perusal of the record would also reveal that the learned Judge, Family Court convicted the appellant/husband for the offence punishable under Section 498-4 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) vide Ex.Ai - Judgment in C.C.No.393 of

1994. Challenging the said Judgment, the appellant/husband preferred an appeal vide Criminal Appeal No.1 l6 of 1998 vide Ex.A5 and the learned appellate Court acquitted the appel lant/husband herein.

16. The aforesaid facts would reveal that there are strained relations between the appellant/husband and the respondent/wife. On consideration of the said aspects only the i ; I I I I I I 7 learned Judge, Family court granted decree of divorce. The said Judgment is reasoned and well founded. The appellant herein failed to make out a case to set aside the judgment passed by the learned Judge, Family court. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

17. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. There shafl be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. V.KAVITHA DEPUTY REGISTRAR 6 //TRUE COPY" SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Judg@, Family Court, Hyderabad- With records, if any) 2. One CC to Sri Mirza Nisar Ahmed Baig, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One bC to Sri Azim Parbatani, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies u, DUPSL s 'i! I n S (J Iitil ?1?6 * * HIGH COURT l-f',f1{.1trfi?t lrtF] JUDGMENT AS.No.52'l ot 2002 DISMISSING THE APPEAL ,o THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE VAKITI RAilIAKRISHNA REDDY Sri Noor Ali Ghadia, S/o Abid bai Rl/o Gandhi Chowk' Adilabad. Smt. Laila, W/o Noor Ali Ghadia, Occ: Business Lead her Goods Centre, Xerox and STD Centre, Lane, Hyderabad. Wear and ,ch T Appeal filed under Section 96 of C.P.C., R/w Section 192 of the Family Court Act. asg;ieved by the Order dL.31-12-2001 in O.S.No.207 of 1997 on the file of the Court of the Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad. oRDER: These appeals coming on for hearing_and upon perusing the grounds. of J""Z* the Judgment and Decrie of the Lower Court and the material papers in the F;[itd and ufon hearing the arguments of Ms. Mujeeb F{himg representing 'S-ri"'filir.a Nisai Ahmed Baig, Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri Azim Parbatani, . Advocate for the ResPondent. That this Gourt both Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the appial be and hereby is dismissed; 2. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal' n s D'-V.K^AVITHA DEPUTY REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, t. The Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad. 2. fwo CD CoPies .f"' HIGH COURT DATED:0911U2025 DECREE AS.No.521 ot 2002 DISMISSING THE EPPEAL o. )o ll/