T. MEENA KUMARI, J. ( 1 ) THIS CMA hasbeen filed by the appellant/ wife questioning the judgment and decree in o. P. No. 306 of 1995 on the file of the Family judge, Hyderabad wherein the petition filed by the respondent/husband for divorce has been allowed. ( 2 ) THE brief facts leading to the filing of the CMA are as follows: the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was performed on 7-4-1982 at Madhya Pradesh and after marriage they lived together at Ajmer. According to the respondent, from the first night onwards the appellant started saying that the sex performance of the respondent herein is not to her satisfaction and that she is not with him and that the desire of the appellant - wife has not been fulfilled by the respondent herein. Hearing such comments the respondent herein was perplexed since he is a potent man and questioned the appellant about her pre-marital sex experience and then the appellant told that while she was studying in Gwalior she came into contact with a Muslim boy fiend and that Muslim boy friend wanted to convert himself into vedik Dharma and marry her and the appellant and her boy friend had an idea to marry each other since the parents of the appellant arranged the marriage with the respondent herein against her will and pleasure. After some time the appellant left to her parents house and she used to praise the Muslim boy and she did not evince any interest to lead marital life with the respondent herein and thereby the respondent herein suffered from mental agony and the appellant also threatened the respondent-husband herein with dire consequences by saying that Gwalior is very close to Chambal valley and she is a phoolandevi. ( 3 ) IT is also stated by the respondent here in that his mother is working as a Lecturer at hyderabad and she is residing in Hyderabad at a house bearing No 4-5-753, Sultan Bazar, hyderabad and the appellant and the respondent herein lived together at hyderabad and during their stay also the appellant did not co-operate with the respondent and she never looked after him with affection and she always insulted and behaved in an arrogant manner and she used to say at the face of the respondent that there is no meaning to share bed with the impotent person. The appellant lived with the respondent till December 1992 at Hyderabad and went to her parents house in the month of January 1993. Since then the appellant is staying with her parents at Gwalior. It is also stated all the efforts that were made by the respondents through mediators became futile and hence the respondent-husband filed the petition seeking divorce. ( 4 ) THE appellant filed counter before the court below denying all the allegations except admitting the fact of performance of the marriage. It is stated in the counter that the respondent invented all false and baseless allegations solely with a view to file a petition seeking divorce and that they never stayed in Hyderabad but they only stayed in Ajmer. On 9-10-1993 the respondent went to hyderabad along with his mother. Further, it is alleged that the respondent is having immoral and illegal relations with a married woman by name Jyosthana and the parents of the respondent herein and others are against to it and they advised the respondent to forget Smt. Jyosthna and to look after the appellant with love and affection but the respondent never heeded their advice and the respondent filed the OP seeking divorce with false, concocted, imaginary, baseless and untenable grounds. ( 5 ) IN the trial court the respondent examined himself as P. W. 1 and on his behalf, his aunt was examined as P. W. 2 and got marked Exs. P-1, P-2 and Exs. A-1 to A-8 i. e. , exs. A-l to A-3 are the letters written by the appellant to her mother-in-law (mother of the respondent) and Exs. A-4 to A-6 are english Translations of Exs. A-l to A-3 and ex. A-7 is the letter written by the Paternal grand father of the appellant to the mother of the respondent herein and Ex. A-8 is the translation of Ex. A-7. On behalf of" the appellant, she was examined as R. W. 1 and got marked Exs. R-1 to 12. ( 6 ) HEARD both sides. A-l to A-3 and ex. A-7 is the letter written by the Paternal grand father of the appellant to the mother of the respondent herein and Ex. A-8 is the translation of Ex. A-7. On behalf of" the appellant, she was examined as R. W. 1 and got marked Exs. R-1 to 12. ( 6 ) HEARD both sides. ( 7 ) THE Court below after appreciating the entire material on record granted divorce mainly on the ground that the relationship between the appellant and the respondent herein were strained immediately after the marriage i. e. , from November 1983 onwards and that they were not blessed with children and both the parties did not take any steps to live together either by mediation and the court below has come to the conclusion that there is no possibility of reunion. ( 8 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial court did not appreciate the evidence properly and had the Trial Court appreciated the evidence with reference to the letters written by the respondent s mother, it would not have granted divorce. The trial court also did not properly appreciate the allegation leveled by the appellant coupled with the documentary evidence available on record that the respondentherein is having relationship with one Jyotsna i. e. sister-in-law of the respondent and hence, the judgment of the trial court is liable to be set aside. ( 9 ) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that by taking into consideration of the fact that no mediations were made by either parties and there is no possibility of reunion since the relationship between them were strained from November 1983 onwards, the trial court has rightly granted divorce and as there is no illegality or irregularity in granting divorce, this CMA is liable to be dismissed. ( 10 ) THE main contention urged on behalf of the appellant is that the respondent herein has deserted and harassed the appellant herein without any fault and the same is evident from the letters written by the mother of the respondent to the respondent; In ex. ( 10 ) THE main contention urged on behalf of the appellant is that the respondent herein has deserted and harassed the appellant herein without any fault and the same is evident from the letters written by the mother of the respondent to the respondent; In ex. R-3 i. e. , letter written by the respondent s mother to the respondent, the mother of the respondent has reminded him that he has quarreled with the appellant after grossly insulting her and that she did not question him even though he has sent her i. e. appellant, without her (respondent s mother) permission. In the said letter the mother of the respondent has questioned the respondent about the discreet relationship between him and his sister-in-law i. e. Jyotsna. In the said letter, it has also been advised the respondent that he should not deny the conjugal rights to the appellant and denying same would amount to committing sin by him. The mother of the respondent also advised him not to punish the appellant even after she tendered apologies to him again and again and he has to accept his wife and that he should not desert his wife and do not quarrel unnecessarily, ( 11 ) IN Ex. R-4, the letter written by the mother of the respondent to the appellant herein on 6-11-1982, she appreciated the services of the appellant towards her by saying that she looked after her very affectionately and she is proud of for having such a dutiful daughter-in-law and the innocent face of the appellant still moving before her eyes. A reading of Ex. R-4 shows that the appellant is a dutiful and beautiful girl and she is very affectionate towards her i. e. , mother-in-law. In Ex. R-6, the letter written by the mother of the respondent to the appellant the mother of the respondent worried by saying that she could not dream that respondent would turn out so mean and if he repeats again she will not see his face and she requested forgiveness since she (mother of the respondent) has arranged the marriage and she will teach a lesson to him. ( 12 ) IN the letter written by respondent s maternal uncle to the father of the respondent on 15-7-1980, he enquired the father of the respondent as to whether the respondent is returning home in the evening by right time or not; and he warned him that attachment of the respondents towards Jyotsna beyond limit will be wrong and will prove troublesome and he ought to bear it in mind seriously. In Ex. R-10, the letter written by the father of the respondent to the mother of respondent on 23-7-1982 about the evading nature of his son i. e. , respondent herein and about the nature of telling lies by him. ( 13 ) A reading of all these letters, which were exchanged before and after marriage of the respondent with the appellant, shows that the mother, father and other relatives of the respondent have expressed doubts over the respondent with regard to his misbehavior towards his wife and they also worried about the relationship with his sisterin-law Jyotsna. The trial Court did not deal with all these letters while granting the divorce to the appellant. ( 14 ) THE main contention of the respondent in the OP is that the appellant did not satisfy with his sex performance from the first day onwards and when he questioned her about pre-marital relationship, she has narrated that she is having a Muslim boy friend and that she has intention to marry him. ( 15 ) IN the letter addressed by the respondent to the appellant on 28-5-1982, which was marked as Ex. R-2, the respondent never stated about the un-pleasantness expressed by appellant with the sex performance and he also did not make a point with regard to the friendship with a muslim boy and on the other hand he stated that the voice of the respondent reverberates in his ears and he cannot explain how strange boredom he felt specially when he has to sleeping in his room. This shows that the allegation made by the respondent in the OP that she expressed her unhappiness with his sex performance from the first night onwards and informing her about the friendship she had with one Muslim boy are all invented for the purpose of filing of the OP. This shows that the allegation made by the respondent in the OP that she expressed her unhappiness with his sex performance from the first night onwards and informing her about the friendship she had with one Muslim boy are all invented for the purpose of filing of the OP. ( 16 ) WITH regard to the contention that the appellant and the respondent never stayed in Hyderabad, the respondent did not adduce any evidence to that effect. The respondent did not choose to examine his mother when he is claiming that the appellant left his matrimonial company while staying with her mother at Hyderabad particularly when it is the case of the appellant that they never lived at Hyderabad. The non-examination of the mother of the respondent by the respondent to prove the above fact would go to show that they never stayed at Hyderabad after their marriage. ( 17 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent never intended to reside in Hyderabad permanently and that mere residing at a particular place for temporary period would not amount to residing and hence mere staying for a temporary period at Hyderabad does not confer the jurisdiction of the Family Court at hyderabad. ( 18 ) THE Supreme Court in the case of jeewanti Pandey v. Kishan Chandra Pandey it has been held as follows:"in order to give jurisdiction on the ground of residence something more than a temporary stay is required. It must be more or less of a permanent character, and of such a nature that the court in which the respondent is sue in hi natural form. Xxx in its ordinary sense residence is more or less of a permanent character. The expression resides means to make an abode for a considerable time; to dwell permanently or for a length of time; to have a settled abode for a time. It is the place where a person has a fixed home or abode. Where there is such fixed home or such abode at one place, his legal and actual place of residence is the same and he cannot be said to reside at any other place where he had gone on a casual or temporary visit. But if he has no established home his actual and physical habitation is the place where he actually or personally resides. But if he has no established home his actual and physical habitation is the place where he actually or personally resides. " ( 19 ) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that since the appellant has participated in the trial without raising an objection with regard to the territorial jurisdiction, the appellant now cannot be permitted to make it an issue in the appeal. In support of his contention, he relied on the following decisions: (1) B, Petroleum Co, v. P. J. Pappu (2) Sukhdeo Singh Rajpurohit v. State (3) Mani v. Kishan Lal ( 20 ) A perusal of the counter filed by the appellant, she vehemently denied the allegation that she and her husband never stayed in Hyderabad and the respondent herein created false and concocted stores with regard to their stay at Hyderabad though they never stayed in Hyderabad. Thus, it has to be construed that the appellant never participated in trial by waiving the objection with regard to the jurisdiction and her participation in the trial would not amount to waiver of objection with regard to the jurisdiction. Hence, the above citations relied on by the respondent are not applicable to the facts of this case. Thus, it has to be held that the Family Court at Hyderabad has no jurisdiction to decide the issue. ( 21 ) APART from that the respondent in his evidence as P. W. 1 deposed that the appellant is having love affair with one Muslim boy. But, in his evidence did not state anything about the dominating character or nature of r. W. 1. When the husband of the appellant did not state any thing about the dominating nature of his wife. P. W. 2, who is maternal uncle of P. W. 1, deposed that the appellant s behaviour was very dominative towards p. W. 1 and in the conversation that he had with her she used to say that she is in no way less inferior to Phoolan-Devi, which goes to show that P. W. 2 is very much interested to help the respondent in getting divorce. ( 22 ) FURTHER, to state about the character and tenor of a wife, the mother-in-law of the appellant is a proper witness. But, in this case, the respondent did not examine his own mother in support of his cause. ( 22 ) FURTHER, to state about the character and tenor of a wife, the mother-in-law of the appellant is a proper witness. But, in this case, the respondent did not examine his own mother in support of his cause. This goes to show that it is the respondent who had deserted the appellant and it is he who has treated cruelly but not the appellant. The respondent in his evidence has categorically stated that he is not prepared to take his wife and keep her with him even if his wife is prepared to come and live with her and he wants divorce since the appellant intended to have share in his properties. In the chief examination, he has attributed so many mala fides to the appellant by stating that she disclosed him that she is having love affair with one Muslim boy and that she openly informed him that his sex performance is not up to her expectation. Thus, the respondent is changing his version from time to time and the appreciation of the entire evidence goes to show that it is he who has harassed and deserted her without any cause or reason and moreover on appreciation of the entire documentary evidence goes to show that their parents and other family elders are having suspicion over him for close behaviour with Jyotsna. All these facts would go to show that the respondent herein is not entitled for divorce. ( 23 ) IN the result, this CMA is allowed and the decree of divorce granted on 19-9-1996 in o. P. No. 306 of 1995 is hereby set aside. However no costs.