The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for specific instances of cruelty, intention for desertion, and substantial evidence for adultery to prove the grounds for divorce under Sec. 13(1)(i)(ia)(ib) of the Family Courts Act 1984.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

VIJAYKUMAR A PATIL, J. - With the consent of learned counsel for both the parties these appeals are heard together, as they arise out of common Judgment and Decree dtd. 26/3/2015 passed by Family Court.

2. These appeals under Sec. 19(1) of the Family Courts Act 1984, (for short 'the Act') have been filed by the appellant/husband against the common judgment and decree dtd. 26/3/2015 passed in M.C.No.9/2013 (Old No.37/2010) and M.C.No.17/2013 (Old No.105/2010) by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chikkamagaluru.

3. The appellant/husband filed M.C.No.9/2013 under Sec. 13(1)(i)(ia)(ib) of the Act seeking decree of divorce, which was dismissed whereas M.C.No.17/2013 filed by first respondent/wife under Sec. 9 of the Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights, was allowed.

4. Facts leading to filing of these appeals briefly stated are that marriage between the appellant/husband and first respondent/wife was solemnized on 2/12/1999 in Chikkamagaluru. It is averred that after marriage the couple started living happily for almost one year in the Estate of the appellant/husband in Kabbinahalli Village, Chkkamagaluru Taluk. It is further averred that first respondent/wife was not happy and she started showing her colours by quarrelling with the appellant/husband on religious rituals, despite consoling her she has not changed herself. It is pleaded that first respondent/wife used to abuse the petitioner in filthy language and used unparliamentary words. It is further pleaded that appellant/husband's parents are old and are dependant on the appellant/husband, but the first respondent/wife used to quarrel with them and used to abuse them in filthy language and despite request and warning, the first respondent/wife has not changed herself. It is averred that appellant/husband gave all the comforts to first respondent/wife, however, she used to keep herself away and aloof and she pressurized the appellant/husband to make a separate residence at Chikkamagaluru, and insisted that appellant should pay the amount of maintenance. It is further averred that as per the demand of the first respondent/wife, a separate residence was provided at Chikkamagaluru and the appellant/husband used to visit once in a month and provide financial support and comforts to her. It is further averred that first respondent/wife used to humiliate the appellant/husband all the time in social gatherings. The first respondent/wife has caused mental cruelty to the appellant/husband without any valid reason.

5. It is also averred that appellant/husband and first respondent/wife have a son by name Skanda. It is averred that first respondent/wife has not taken care of the minor son also and she used to tell that she had married the appellant/husband only because of coercion exercised by her parents. It is pleaded that first respondent/wife never used to work in the matrimonial home, and the appellant/husband's parents used to prepare the food and serve her. It is pleaded that even though appellant/husband and first respondent/wife lived together separately for more than 8 years, there is no cohabitation between them and without any reason she left the matrimonial home by deserting the appellant/husband and started living separately since April 2002.

6. It is averred that first respondent/wife was treated for temperamental issues prior to the marriage and several panchayats were held between the parties, yet, there were no positive results. The appellant/husband set up a separate house in August 2006 as per demand of respondent/wife in the fond hope that she would improve.

7. Despite request by the appellant/husband to the first respondent/wife to join matrimonial home for last three years, she has not heeded to his request. It is further averred that initially first respondent/wife agreed for consent divorce, and thereby both the appellant/husband and first respondent/wife approached late D.L. Krishnaswamy, Advocate, Chikkamagaluru, and got a joint petition dra