The main legal point established in the judgment is that the evidence of cruelty and desertion must be substantial to grant a decree of divorce. The sincerity of efforts to preserve the marriage can influence the court's decision in upholding the judgment for restitution of conjugal rights.

JUDGMENT

G.A.SANAP,J.

1. In both these appeals the parties are same and therefore, these two appeals are disposed of by common Judgment. The Family Court Appeal No. 25 of 2015 is filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed in Petition No. A-203 of 2013 whereby, the Family Court granted the decree for restitution of conjugal rights, as prayed by the respondent. The Family Court Appeal No. 26 of 2015 is filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed in Petition No. A-962 of 2011 whereby, the Family Court rejected the decree for divorce, as prayed by the appellant.

2. The facts giving rise to these appeals are as follows:

The petitions filed by both the parties before the Family Court, Nagpur was the second round of litigation between them praying the identical reliefs. The marriage between the appellant and respondent is the inter caste love marriage. They got married on 10/7/2000 at Nagpur. The couple was blessed with a daughter, on 28/6/2008. In the year 2002, the appellant had filed petition bearing No. A-421 of 2002 for divorce. The respondent had filed the petition bearing No. 1824 of 2004 for restitution of conjugal rights. The petition filed by the appellant for divorce was dismissed and the petition filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights was allowed. The friends and relatives after this first round of litigation intervened and therefore, the misunderstanding between them was sorted out. They decided to continue their married life. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was kept secret from the families and therefore, at the insistence of the families on 5/10/2006, by performing the religious ceremonies, they again got married. The appellant and the respondent, thereafter, resumed cohabitation. They resided together with mother of the respondent, his sister, his elder brother and one family friend. The house of respondent consists of two bedrooms, living room and kitchen.

3. It is the case of the appellant, that prior to 5/10/2006, she was working as 'Medical Practitioner' with Charitable Trust - Bhauji Daftari Smarak Trust at Mahal, Nagpur. As far as the allegations of cruelty is concerned, according to the appellant, the family members of the respondent compelled her to do all household work alone. They did not engage maid/servant. The household work of washing utensils, clothes, sweeping and mopping was below the dignity and status of the appellant, being a Medical Practitioner. The family members of the respondent used to continuously criticize and taunt the appellant inasmuch as the marriage between the appellant and respondent was inter-caste marriage. The appellant was subjected to insult and humiliation by the respondent and his family members. The grievance made by the appellant to the respondent, about her miseries and agonies, fell on deaf ear. On the contrary, the respondent told her that due to their inter caste marriage, they were unable to find a suitable match for his sister. The appellant would, therefore, be required to tolerate and bear with the situation. The appellant was conceived in JanuaryFebruary, 2007. It is the case of the appellant that during her first pregnancy, she was tortured and humiliated. During this period of her pregnancy she was subjected to insurmountable cruelty. It is stated that due to the stress and depression, there was miscarriage. On 25/6/2007, the family members came to know that it was a male fetus. Therefore, the harassment and cruelty was increased. They blamed the appellant for the miscarriage. They told her that the father of the respondent-Nitin, who expired on 25/12/2000 was destined to take rebirth in the family. The respondent and his family members cursed the appellant for denying them an opportunity of company of the father of the respondent on re-birth. However, the medical check up revealed that the abortion was caused due to the 'Rubella infection'. It is stated that they bl