J.B. PARDIWALA, J.

1. This Appeal u/s 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act is at the instance of a husband in a proceeding for divorce u/s 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act') and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 4th May, 1990 passed by the learned City Civil Judge, Ahmadabad in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 293 of 1983, thereby dismissing the application filed by the husband for divorce on the ground of cruelty by the wife. The case made out by the husband (hereinafter referred to as, 'the appellant') in the petition for divorce may be enumerated below, rather in detail in order to appreciate the allegations of cruelty in proper perspective.

2. The parties were married according to the Hindu rites and rituals on January 21, 1979 at Udaipur and in the said wedlock a son named Chaitanya was born on January 24, 1980.

3. As the appellant had a transferable job, the appellant and the respondent co-habited together as husband and wife at Delhi, Jaipur and at Ahmadabad. At the time of filing of the divorce application, the parties were residing together as husband and wife at Ahmadabad. After separation, the appellant started residing at Mumbai while the respondent resided at Udaipur.

4. Initially, for a few months after the marriage, the relation between the parties was normal with some minor problems, which the husband thought would vanish as time would pass and both of them would get adjusted in the conjugal rights.

5. It is the case of the appellant that after marriage, he was residing with respondent far away from his family members and, therefore, the respondent had no restraint of a joint family setup and no interference of any kind from any of the family members of the appellant.

6. After about one year from the date of marriage when the parties were at Jaipur, the behaviour of the respondent all of a sudden changed and became quarrelsome. The appellant was informed by the respondent that before marriage she was possessed with evil spirit affecting her brain and heart and for which her parents had given her treatment. The appellant was informed by the respondent that despite taking treatment, there was no improvement, as a result of which, the respondent was asked to wear a bracelet on her biceps. The appellant was told by the respondent that as a result of which she gets aggressive and starts fighting.

7. When the parties were at Jaipur, the respondent used to pick up quarrels at the top of a head without any justification and was in the habit of restraining the appellant from going to his office. The respondent also used to abuse and insult the appellant in presence of neighbours and other outsiders. The respondent used to insult parents of the appellant by using unsavoury language.

8. On September 26, 1980 i.e. when the son of the parties was about 9 months old, the parents of the appellant came to Jaipur. At that point of time, the respondent picked up quarrel with the parents of the appellant on the ground that the clothes which were given by the parents of the respondent for her son lying at Udaipur were not brought by her in-laws. According to the appellant, the respondent created a ruckus on this issue and almost behaved like a lunatic. The respondent also threatened that she would ruin the life of the appellant and will not allow any of the family members of the appellant to live in peace. The respondent used abusive language and used to address her inlaws as "kamine kutte".

9. On or about November 7, 1980, the appellant and the respondent went to Mumbai to enjoy the festival of Diwali and stayed at the place of the elder brother of the appellant. While having dinner on that day, the respondent abruptly and without any rhyme or reason, asked the appellant to drop her at the house of respondent's aunty at Colaba, Mumbai. The appellant persuaded the respondent to wait for some time and that he would definitely drop her at her aunty's house after the dinner. At that point of time, all