R. SUBBIAH, J.

1. These appeals are filed by the appellant-husband challenging the fair and decreetal orders dated 16.11.2009 passed in M.O.P.Nos.102 of 2001 and M.O.P.No.49 of 2012 respectively, on the file of the Family Court, Pondicherry. By the said order dated 16.11.2009, the Family Court dismissed M.O.P.No.49 of 2002 filed by the appellant-husband under Article 242 of the French Civil Code, to dissolve the marriage solemnized between him and the respondent-wife on 21.06.1989. Consequently, the Family Court allowed M.O.P.No.102 of 2001 filed by the respondent-wife under Article 214 of the French Civil Code to direct the appellant-husband to live with her by restituting the conjugal rights.

2. The Original Petition in M.O.P.No.49 of 2002 was filed by the appellant-husband contending that the marriage between him and the respondent-was solemnized on 21.06.1989 at St.Joseph Church at Wellington as per the Christian customs and rites. After marriage, they started their conjugal home at Crushpet, Wellington, Nilgiris District. The respondent-wife lived with the appellant in the matrimonial home only for ten days and thereafter, she went back to Pondicherry. Subsequently, she did not return back to the matrimonial home. Even during the above period of ten days, when the respondent-wife was residing along with the appellant-husband in the matrimonial home, her conduct and behaviour were indifferent and quarrelsome. After she went to Pondicherry, she was working in a School. She was insisting the appellant-husband to come and live along with her at Pondicherry by leaving his ailing dependent mother and spinster sister at Ooty and by resigning his employment in the Government of Tamil Nadu. Since the appellant-husband was working in Fire Service Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu, he cannot get transfer to the Union Terrirtory of Pondicherry. Hence, the appellant-husband was unable to accept her demand; on the other hand, as per the custom, she has to come and live along with him in the matrimonial home at Crushpet, Ooty. The appellant-husband also went to Pondicherry several times, persuaded and requested the respondent to come and live with him, but in vain. Even during such persuasion, the respondent reiterated her demand to leave his mother and sister and to come and live with her at Pondicherry. Thus, she refused to return back to matrimonial home to live with the appellant-husband. She deserted the appellant-husband and was living separately at Pondicherry without any justifiable reason for the past 29 years.

3. It is the further case of the appellant-husband that in order to cause mental agony and harassment and to spoil his reputation, the respondent gave a false complaint to the appellant-husband's senior officer on one occasion and on receiving such complaint, the senior officer called him over wireless and informed him that his wife has given a compliant and called him to appear before him. Since the appellant-husband was called over wireless, the news was also received by the employees at the Fire Station. The appellant-husband has got an age old mother and an unmarried sister and he has to take care of them, and therefore, the appellant-husband was not in a position to resign his job and go to Pondicherry. The respondent-wife deserted the appellant-husband and was living separately, which has caused mental pain and agony to the appellant-husband. Therefore, the appellant-husband has filed the Original Petition seeking to dissolve the marriage solemnized between him and the respondent on 21.06.1989.

4. The case of the appellant-husband was resisted by the respondent-wife by filing counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the Original Petition. It is the case of the respondent-wife that it is false to state that from the first day of the marriage, she behaved in an indifferent manner with the appellant-husband. She has denied that she has lived with the appellant-husband only for ten days at Welling