( 1 ) THIS judgment will decide both the appeals, i. e. , FAO Nos. 77 and 78 of 1991 since these arise out of the common judgment dated 15th March, 1991 passed by Mrs. Manju Goel, Additional District Judge, Delhi in HMA 596/83 under Section 12 (l) (c) of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the act ) seeking a decree for annulment of marriage, and HMA 270/84 under Section 13 (l) (ia) (iii) of the Act seeking a divorce.

( 2 ) BOTH the petitions were consolidated and tried together. The evidence was recorded only in HMA No-596/83. HMA 270/84 was comprehensive to FAO 78/91 include the facts of other earlier petition as well, i. e. , HMA 596/83.

( 3 ) THE relevant facts set out in the petitions are that the parties were married on 22. 4. 83 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies and the conjugal life of the parties lasted only till 20. 9. 83. The Respondent, Anita Sharma, who was employed as an officer in the State Bank of India, Kota, lived with the Appellant in his house at JP-87, Maurya Enclave, Delhi-34 intermittently. According lo the Appellant, the Respondent s behaviour was such as would demonstrate that she was mentally unsound and was suffering fr