( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 4. 1. 2002 passed by the Court of the Additional District Judge whereby the petition of the appellant for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce was dismissed. A few facts relevant for deciding this appeal are:

( 2 ) MARRIAGE between the parties was performed according to Hindu rites and customs on 15. 2. 1997. From the wedlock of the parties, one male child was born on 9. 11. 1998. Alleging that the respondent had treated him with cruelty, the appellant filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the allegations as contained in the petition. Some details of the alleged acts of cruelty were given in the petition. Paragraphs 4 to 24 of the petition narrating incidents of the alleged cruelty read as under: -

( 3 ). That from the very beginning of the marriage, the respondent showed disinclination to settle in the matrimonial home. The petitioner tried very hard to break down the resistance, thinking she was shy but every time the petitioner tried to approach the respondent she projected herself to be of higher status and better family than the petitioner and blatantly said that she had made a mistake in marrying so low, as against the many good offers coming her way. It was only on the petitioner insistence that the marriage was consummated.

( 4 ). On 15th May, 1997, the petitioner coming to his room was aghast on finding the respondent trying to slit her writs with a knife which he managed to wrench away. He also found scattered tiny pieces of torn photographs and even on persistent questioning the respondent refused to disclose the particulars of the photographs and only kept repeating that she had made a big mistake in marrying the petitioner. The petitioner was very saddened by this, nevertheless he consoled her and promised her that he would try to live up to her expectations.

( 5 ). That on 18. 05. 1997, the petitioner took the respondent to Appu Ghar where the respondent picked up a fight in front of other visits stating that she was unable to travel in buses and the petitioner should buy a scooter. When the petitioner informed her that he was unable to afford a scooter, and all good things of life would come by and by, she stated that her brother Tikaram earned Rs. 7,000. 00 per month which he gave to his wife and since all the respondents friends inquired from her about her husband s (the petitioner) salary; she felt very small and ashamed of the petitioner as he was only an office assistant. She also said she was used to eating food cooked in Ghee and not oil, as was the case in the petitioner s house. The petitioner was horrified and felt small and fallen in his own eyes. The petitioner asked the respondent why had she agreed to marry him since his official and residential status was well known to the respondent and her family and all the residents of the area, since they belonged to the same locality, but, the respondent cried to bitterly that the petitioner was forced to hire a three wheeler and bring the respondent home.

( 6 ). That on 10. 06. 1997 when the petitioner was returning home from work he was accosted by the respondent s cousin Ms. Krishna who inquired of the petitioners well being and asked if the respondent had settled down. She informed the petitioner that the respondent had an emotionally unstable mind and had already suffered one broken relationship on account of her erratic conduct. The petitioner was perturbed and not knowing what to make of this voluntary disclosure he brushed away the said lady. He returned home to find his wife sleeping on the bed with a long face and on asking as to why she was sitting separately and not with the other family members watching television the respondent rudely shouted at the petitioner that she was used to watching colour television and had she know that she was marrying into a beggars house who could afford only a black and white television she