(1.) THE appeal is directed against the judgment of Additional District Judge, Hissar, dated 17th December, 1988 vide which the petition filed by the petitioner, hereinafter referred to as the "appellant" under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce, was dismissed. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the appellant before this Court is that he was married to Smt Indro, respondent, in the month of June, 1979 at village Bas Azamshahpur, Tehsil Hansi, District Hissar according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The parties co-habited together as husband and wife and out of their wed-lock, three female children were born out of which two children are alive. Neetika, the elder daughter is in the custody of the appellant whereas Deepika, the younger daughter, is in the custody of respondent. The third female child who was born in 1982 had expired after 6/7 days of her birth.
(2.) IN the Divorce Petition, the appellant had sought dissolution of the marriage on the grounds that his wife Smt. Indro, respondent, had treated him with cruelty and was living in adultery. The appellant had further alleged that the respondent wife is a lady of hot temperament and often used to hurl abuses on him and his parents. She refused to obey the command of the appellant as well as his parents and often she used to decline preparing meals for him and his parents. The appellant had also claimed that the respondent had been proclaiming that she had been married against her wishes. As the respondent had great attachment with her parents, she used to leave the matrimonial house without the appellant's permission and his parents. In the month of June 1980, the respondent resided with him only for 2/3 days. In the middle of February, 1983 Risal Singh, brother of the respondent had taken the respondent with him on the assurance that she would be sent back after 15 days, but she did not turn up. The appellant visited the house of his in-laws on 21-5-1983 and brought the respondent back. On 12. 7. 1983, Tek Chand, uncle of the respondent came to the appellant's house and took the respondent on the assurance that she would be sent back after a week. The respondent did not care to return to the matrimonial house after staying about a week. On 6. 6. 1985 the father of the respondent took her with him in the absence of the appellant. At that time while going with his father, she had taken with her whole of the jewellery and clothes.
(3.) THE appellant had claimed that the respondent was leading an adulterous life with some person. In spite of all this, the appellant had compromised. On earlier occasion, a Divorce Petition was filed and the matter was compromised. However, the respondent did not improve herself and used to remain absent during nights. The respondent even refused to provide sexual company to the appellant with the result that the appellant had suffered a great mental agony.