( 1 ) ALLEGING adultery coupled with cruelty, respondent-1 wife filed petition under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act (hereinafter called the 'act'), praying to pass a decree nisi and to grant her the custody of the minor children. She further prayed for issuance of directions to the appellant-husband for providing sufficient means by way of settlements towards education, shelter, food, clothing, medical and other incidental expenses. On proof of the averments made, a decree nisi for dissolution of the marriage between the parties was passed in favour of the wife granting her six months time to seek an absolute decree. Minor children were directed to be given in the custody of the wife till the decree was made absolute. In the absence of sufficient evidence, the other reliefs claimed by the wife were not allowed by the learned single Judge in the order impugned in the appeal. It is submitted that the judgment and decree passed against the appellant is against law and facts which requires to be set aside.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to the filing of the appeal are that the appellant and respondent No. 1 were married in accordance with the Christian rites on 20th December, 1981 at Hudson Memorial Church, Bangalore. Out of the wedlock, one male and another female children were born. The appellant husband was alleged to have neglected his wife and the children from 1-1-1991 onwards. The appellant was alleged to have come in contact with Miss Premakumari, R2 herein. She was stated to be a Nurse and the appellant husband hired an apartment adjoining to his work spot where they used to meet. It was further alleged that he managed her transfer to Vani Vilas Hospital, Bangalore, by allegedly giving a bribe of Rs. 12,000/- Premakumari was alleged to have given birth to a daughter in 1986. The daughter was alleged to have been conceived out of the illicit relationship of the husband and the said Premakumari. The name of the appellant husband was shown in the Kumud Nursing Home, Jayanagar, Bangalore, as father of the child. Out of this illicit relationship it is alleged that she gave birth to another male child in 1989. Efforts to disassociate the appellant from having extra marital relationship with the aforesaid lady allegedly did not bear any result and the relationship between the two widened. It was alleged that the appellant husband used to pick up quarrel with his wife and threatened her with dire consequences if she refused to part with money which she was earning from her employment. She was alleged to have been subjected to physical and mental cruelty. The husband was alleged to have made attempts to hit his wife with an iron rod when she refused to give the keys of the almirah. Much against the wishes of his wife, the appellant was alleged to be taking his children to the house of his alleged concubine. The appellant husband was further alleged to be a womaniser. He was alleged to have developed sexual relationship with R-3 herein who was a widow at the relevant time having a teenaged daughter.

( 3 ) ON denial of allegations made by the wife, the learned single Judge formulated the following points for determination. " (a) whether the petitioner has established that the respondent is guilty of adultery ? (b) Whether the petitioner has established that the respondent has treated her with such cruelty as to entitle her to a decree of judicial separation? (c) Whether the petitioner has condoned the adultery committed by respondent ? (d) Whether the petitioner is presented or prosecuted in collusion with the respondent ? and, (e) Whether the petitioner is entitled to the divorce sought for?"on proof of points (a) and (b) and in the absence of evidence for point (c), the learned single Judge allowed the petition as noted herein above.

( 4 ) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant has vehemently submitted that her client was not proved to have violated any of the conditions specified under S. 10 of the Act.