In order to obtain a decree for judicial separation or divorce on the ground of cruelty or desertion, the petitioner must prove by satisfactory evidence that the respondent has committed acts of cruelty or desertion within the meaning of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

( 1 ) ON February 27, 1963 the respondent Sukomal Choudhury, had married the appellant, Bijoli Choudhnry, according to Buddhist Rites at P 12/1, Dihi Serampore Road, P. S. Beniapu-kur, Calcutta. On 23rd November, 1972 the respondent-husband presented a petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the District Judge's Court, Alipore praying for a decree of judicial separation. The present appellant contested the said case. The learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court, Alipore by his judgment dated 7th July, 1975 granted a decree for judicial separation on the ground that the appellant had treated her husband respondent herein with cruelty within the meaning of Section 10 (1) (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. According to the learned Additional District Judge, she had also deserted her husband for two years or more within the meaning of Section 10 (1) (b) of the said Act. The appellant wife has presented this appeal against the said decision of the learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court Alipore. During the pendency of this appeal the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 was enacted which inter-alia made several amendments in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1953. The respondent husband has filed an application in this Court for amendment of his petition/plaint filed in the Court below inter-alia for inserting a prayer that a decree of divorce be granted to him under Clause (ia) and (ib) of Sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, The said application of the respondent husband has been heard along with the appeal preferred by the appellant wife. We have to consider whether or not the learned Additional District Judge has correctly found that the appellant wife after solemnisation of the marriage had treated her husband with cruelty and whether or not she had deserted him for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding to presentation of the petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

( 2 ) BOTH the appellant and the respondent, as already stated, are Buddhists and their families came from the district of Chittagong. The respondent husband in his evidence stated that when he was aged five, both his father and mother had died. He was brought up by his grandmother and then by his aunt. According to the appellant wife her farher used to give monetary help to her husband even before he married her. The respondent husband however did not admit the said fact But even according to him, he had started living in the house of his prospective father-in-law three months before his M. A. examination. In November, 1962 the respondent had passed the M. A. examination in Pali language and he stood first in the first class. On 27th March, 1963 the marriage between the parties took place at the residence of the appellant's father at Dihi Serampore Road, Calcutta and the respondent continued to live in his father-in-law's house.

( 3 ) THE respondent husband in paragraph 6 of his petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act had claimed that the marital life of the parties had started quite happily and their days were passing normally except for minor differences of views over small matters. He had further averred in his petition under Section 10 of the Act that in or about the year 1965 the appellant slowly had a change in her behaviour. She became arrogant about her father's status in society in comparison with his family and his social status. She showed her undue superiority complex and vanity. She tried to subdue him with an air of superiority. In the year 1966 the appellant had become pregnant. She did not allow the doctors and nurses to examine her condition and abused and misbehaved with them. The baby was seriously injured during delivery and died six days after. After this, according to the husband, his wife showed landslide change in her behaviour for the worse. She became nagging and on every word or act of the petitioner would find fault with him a