JUDGMENT :

1. The appellant/wife has filed this appeal under Section 28(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). She is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 19.09.2016 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court at Tumakuru in M.C. No. 59/2015 under Section 13(1)(i-a) (i-b) of the Act filed by the respondent/husband seeking divorce and to dissolve marriage which took place on 03.03.2014.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant and respondent having solemnized their marriage at Gayathri Kalyana Mantapa, Tumakuru on 03.03.2014 in terms of Hindu customs. The alleged allegations are that appellant resided with the respondent in his house only for a period of 6 months. Appellant abruptly left the respondent’s house in the 1st week of September and settled in her parents house. Repeated requests by the respondent, appellant did not heed. In fact in the 2nd week of October, respondent approached appellant in her parental house and requested her to join him for which she refused to join him. So also parents of the appellant also refused to send her saying that she is suffering from breathing problem. When things stood thus, panchayats were conveyed to settle the score among the appellant and respondent which went in vain. In this background, respondent issued a legal notice to the appellant on 05.03.2015 asking her to join him. Appellant had given reply alleging various allegations against respondent and his parents like appellant did not do her household work and she was adamant. Further, her demand was that the respondent has to make necessary arrangement to stay at Bengaluru etc.

3. After receipt of appellant’s reply to notice, respondent presented petition before the Family Court at Tumakuru seeking divorce and to dissolve the marriage among the respondent and appellant. Court below proceeded to pass judgment and decree in favour of the respondent while allowing his petition under Section 13(1)(i-a) (i-b) of the Act while dissolving the marriage solemnized on 03.03.2014 between respondent and appellant. It was also ordered that appellant is not entitled to maintenance or permanent alimony from the respondent. Thus, feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Court below dated 19.09.2016, appellant has presented this appeal.

4. In support of appellant’s appeal, she has contended that mere leaving the company of the house does not amount to any cruelty. It may be a ground for grant of divorce under the provisions of desertion. Therefore, reasoning of the Court below that appellant had left the company of the respondent which amounts to cruelty is liable to be set-aside. It was further contended that she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home by the act and conduct of the respondent. In the absence of necessary material, Court below has erred in concluding that the appellant had left the matrimonial home on her own without appreciating the reasons for living the matrimonial home. It is also contended that marriage took place on 03.03.2014 whereas the divorce petition was presented on 25.03.2015 on the ground of desertion having regard to the fact that it was just one year and few days in presenting divorce petition from the date of marriage. Therefore, Court below should have rejected petition at threshold on the score that for the purpose of entertaining divorce petition, there must be desertion for continuous period of 2 years.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that as regards issue no. 5 for payment of maintenance to the appellant, has not been dealt by the Court below with reference to the material available. Merely appellant is a graduate and she can get any job to earn her livelihood and intends to shift to Bengaluru to earn her livelihood, would not suffice in refusing to grant payment of maintenance or permanent alimony.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent supported the judgment and decree of the Court below and vehemently re