RAMAMURTI, J. :- I have perused the judgment of my learned brother; with respect, I entriely agree with his reasonings and conclusions. The only justification for my writing a separate judgment is (as Lord Campbell observed in Piers v. Piers, (1849) 2 HL Cas 331 : 9 ER 1118 observed at page 1136), the tremendous responsibility that is cast upon us while rendering this decision which will have grave and serious consequences upon the status of the child. We have bestowed anxious and careful thought over all the aspects of the matter and have reached the clear conclusion that applying all the standards of strict proof beyond all reasonable doubt, as insisted in all matrimonial cases, the appellant had made out a case for judicial separation under Section 10 (1) (f) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 (referred to herein as the Act) i. e. on the ground that the respondent had had sexual intercourse with some person other than the appellant. The prayer for a decree of divorce under Section 13 (1) (i) of the Act on the ground that the respondent was living in adultery was not pressed before us.

In a proceeding under Section 13, for a decree of divorce, on the ground of adultery, it is