Burden of proof lies on the person alleging.

This appeal arises out of a petition filed by the respondent herein under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. The appellant herein married the respondent in March, 1955, and they lived together at Narasaraopet from March, 1955, to the middle of 1957. As the respondent became pregnant, she was taken to Madras by the appellant and was left with her parents for confinement. She delivered a still-born child on 10th August, 1957. The respondent thereafter joined the appellant at Guntur by the end of 1957 where she lived with him till about May, 1958. In May, 1958, the appellant went on leave and took the respondent to Madras and after leaving her with her parents,he went away to Salur, his native place to attend to a litigation concerning his family house. On the expiry of the leave, the appellant was posted to Srikakulam where the respondent joined him in November, 1958. In June, 1959, the appellant was promoted from Supervisor to Assistant Engineer and posted to Vizag. The appellant went to Vizag leaving the respondent at Srikakulam and took charge on 16th June, 1959. After fixing up an accommodation at Vizag the appellant went to Srikakulam and brought the respondent to Vizag on 6th July, 1959. On 9th September, 1959, the couple left Vizag and came over to Madras. Ever since that date the respondent has been residing only in Madras. All the above facts are not in controversy. But the controversy is only in relation to the circumstances under which the respondent was brought from Vizag to Madras in September, 1959, where she continues to reside with her parents.

2. The case of the respondent is that during the last stages of their stay in Vizag the respondent was ill for a short time and as accommodation at Vizag was costly ana not convenient and as the appellant’s jurisdiction extended up-to Nellore as a result of which he had to spend most of his time on tour, the couple decided that the residence at Vizag should be vacated and that they should take up residence at Madras so that the appellant may visit the respondent as often as possible whenever he went over to Nellore. The couple came to Madras and stayed together from 10th September, 1959, to 14th September, 1959, and the appellant left for Nellore on 14th September, 1959, promising to return in two days to take the respondent to Tirupathi to fulfil a vow. The appellant did not turn up but sent a telegram on 25th September, 1959, from Nellore asking the respondent’s father to meet him there. On 26th September, 1959, the respondent and her parents went to Nellore and stayed in the Traveller’s Bungalow for the night. The appellant and the respondent together slept in one suite of rooms and her parents stayed in another suite of rooms. The next morning the appellant flourished before the respondent’s father three letters said to have been written by the respondent to her alleged paramours. This he did with a view to blackmail and malign the respondent’s parents for extracting some money from them for discharging his liability over the family house. Thereupon, the respondent and her parents came over to Madras on 27th September, 1959, and ever since that date the appellant has refused to take back the respondent and the conduct of the appellant forcing her to live in her parents’ house at Madras is unjustified.

3. The case of the appellant husband is, however, as follows: — The couple:never intended to vacate their residence at Vizag in September, 1959, but they came to Madras only for a temporary visit and when it was found that the respondent was unchaste and was writing letters to her paramours in a clandestine manner, the appellant while he was at Nellore on 25th September, 1959, sent a telegram to the respondent’s father to come to Nellore and when he came there with his wife and daughter (the respondent), the letters written by the respondent to her paramours were shown to him and he was thoroughly put out and immediately left