(1.) The husband sought divorce from respondent-wife on the ground that she suffered from a mental disorder of such a kind as is dealt with in clause (iii) of section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
(2.) The mental disorder that she is alleged to be suffering is termed as 'Schizophrenia'. The matrimonial Court finds that this mental disorder stands established on the record. It nevertheless dismissed the petition on the ground that it was not enough to establish that the respondent-wife suffered from mental disorder which in the explanation added to clause (iii) of section 13 includes 'Schizophrenia' for it had further to be established that that mental disorder was of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner could not reasonably be expected to live with the respondent suffering from the said mental disorder.
(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant has taken me through the evidence of Dr. Rajinder Arora and that of the petitioner himself, as also Exhibit R-1. The doctor in his testimony has not said that the mental discorder, with which the respondent-wife was suffering was of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner could not reasonably be expected to live with her. The petitioner also in his testimony has not said a word that it would not be possible for him to live with the respondent-wife because of mental disorder that she was suffering from. He has not stated in his testimony anything about her behaviour either towards him or towards his family members or towards anybody else, from which it could be concluded that the state of her mental disorder was such that for any reasonable person it would be difficult to live with her,