Iqbal Ahmed Ansari, J.

1. This is an appeal against fee judgment and decree, dated 03.12.2009, passed, in Title Suit (Matrimonial) No. 13/2008, by the learned Additional District Judge (FTC), Sivasagar, whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the suit instituted under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of marriage with the respondent herein on the ground that the respondent had deserted the petitioner-appellant. Aggrieved by the dismissal of his suit, the petitioner has preferred this appeal.

2. We have heard Mr. S. Murarka, learned counsel for the appellant, and Mr. S.R. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. While considering the present appeal, it needs to be pointed out, at the very outset, as to what the case of the appellant, while seeking dissolution of his marriage with the respondent, was? For this purpose, the case of the petitioner-appellant, as presented in the learned Court below, may, in brief, be described thus:-

(i) A marriage had been solemnized, on 28.11.2005, between the petitioner and the respondent. A few days after their marriage, some misunderstandings developed in the conjugal life of the parties concerned and, in consequence thereof, the respondent left, in the first week of January, 2006, her matrimonial home for her parental house. Though the petitioner tried to bring the respondent back to his conjugal life, he failed Failing to get over the misunderstandings, the petitioner and the respondent mutually decided to rescind their marital-tie and, accordingly, an agreement was reached, on 21.04.2007, whereunder the respondent returned to the petitioner all those articles/materials, including gold ornaments, which had been given to her by the petitioner at the time of their marriage and she took back all those articles/materials, including gold ornaments, which she had brought by her to her matrimonial home from her parental house at the time of her marriage. Though the petitioner requested the respondent to file an appropriate petition mutually seeking divorce, the respondent refused to do so and the petitioner, therefore, filed the suit seeking dissolution of his marriage with the respondent on the ground that the respondent had deserted him since the first week of January, 2006.

4. The respondent resisted the suit by filing written statement, wherein her case was, briefly stated, thus:-

(i) The marriage between the parties concerned was solemnized on 28.11.2005. Thereafter, the parties to the marriage started living together in the house of the petitioner. Since the time of the marriage, the behaviour of the petitioner towards the respondent was rude and cruel. The petitioner used to pick up quarrel over petty matters and ill-treated the respondent on the ground that she had not brought adequate dowry. The respondent was very keen to live with the petitioner, but it became impossible to live with him inasmuch as the petitioner doubted the character of the respondent. Compelled by such circumstances, the respondent left her matrimonial home after about 14 (fourteen) months of her marriage with the petitioner. As the petitioner's attitude towards the respondent did not change, the respondent was compelled to sign, on 21.04.2007, an agreement, whereunder both the parties concerned mutually decided to tack back all their articles/materials and the respondent accordingly brought back to her parental house all those articles/materials, including gold ornaments, etc., which had been given to her at the time of her marriage and, since then, the parties concerned have been living separately in terms of the mutual agreement reached by them on 21.4.2007. After instituting the instant suit seeking a decree of dissolution of marriage, the petitioner solemnized second marriage and it was in this background that the respondent lodged an Ejahar, at Sonari Police Station, against the petitioner and, treating the said Ejahar as First Information Report, Sonari Police Station Case N