B N ACHAR Vs. G SARASWATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner-husband is the appellant herein, being aggrieved by the order dated 6-1-1994 passed in m. c. No. 46 of 1988 on the file of the ii additional civil judge at mysore, whereby the learned civil judge dismissed the appellant's petition for divorce filed under Section 13 (l) (i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('the act' for short ).

(2.) THE appellant being dissatisfied and undaunted by the findings of the trial court that the appellant was not able to prove either the ground of cruelty or the ground of desertion, has come up in appeal to this court under Section 28 of the act.

(3.) THE brief facts leading to this appeal are as under. The appellant and respondent are husband and wife pursuant to a marriage solemnised on 22-5-1977 as per hindu rites. The appellant and respondent were both working as lecturers at the time of marriage. The couple got a male child in the year 1982. In the interregnum, the appellant-husband who had been awarded a scholarship had gone for higher studies under u. s. a. Nasa fellowship at u. s. a. In the year 1979 and it appears the respondent had also accompanied him and had occasion to stay with the appellant-husband for a period of about three months, but thereafter she had returned to india. One Sri subbarayachar, maternal uncle of the respondent-wife, was an ardent well-wisher of the couple and it appears both the husband and wife had great regard and respect for this person who had retired as a professor from the Mysore university and who was a person much senior in the university, to the appellant-husband as well as respondent 1. In fact, it appears that on the invitation of this person, the couple were staying in his residence located at jayalakshmipuram, mysore. It was while they were so residing, that the appellant-husband got an opportunity to go abroad for further studies. After the appellant-husband returned completing his further studies at u. s. a. , it appears, differences did arise between the parties and their marriage has not worked thereafter. While this narration to this extent is not in dispute between the parties, the respective versions are as under: