JUDGMENT :

J. Nisha Banu, J.

1. These appeals have been filed by the appellant/husband challenging the common judgment passed by the first appellate Court in C.M.A. Nos. 36 and 64 of 2009, whereby and whereunder the first appellate Court has set aside the order passed by the trial Court granting divorce on the ground of desertion to the appellant/husband and dismissed H.M.O.P.

2. For better appreciation and understanding, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court. As the issue involved in both the second appeals are interrelated to each other, they heard together and are being disposed of by way of this common judgment.

3. The petitioner/husband has filed H.M.O.P. No. 239 of 2004 for divorce.

4. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner/husband are as follows:

The marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent was solemnized on 04.02.2001 as per Hindu rites and custom. At the time of marriage, the first respondent came with totally 7 sovereigns of gold jewels and the petitioner presented 9-1/2 sovereigns of Thali chain to her. After few days from marriage, the first respondent expressed that she was not interested to marry the petitioner and she married the petitioner due to compulsion of her parents. The first respondent/wife lived with the petitioner in the matrimonial home for a period of one week. Thereafter, they went to the respondent's parents' house. The first respondent did not come back and live with the petitioner. The respondent quarrelled with the petitioner and threatened that she will commit suicide. A panchayat was conducted. On 19.01.2002 the petitioner brought the first respondent to his house and the first respondent stayed there till 04.02.2002. During that stay also, she quarrelled with the petitioner and went to her parent's home. In the last week of April 2002, the respondent voluntarily returned back to matrimonial home and lived with the petitioner. Thereafter, she quarrelled with the petitioner and left the matrimonial home on 08.06.2002. The petitioner met with an accident on 12.02.2003 and took treatment. But the first respondent was never concerned about the petitioner and never turned up to see the petitioner. Further, for his business purpose, the petitioner had to stay at Champa, near Raipur. The first respondent refused to come and live with the petitioner there. On 04.04.2004, the 2nd respondent called the petitioner over phone and met him on 05.04.2004. On 05.04.2004, the 2nd respondent informed the petitioner that he had an intimacy with the 1st respondent. The 2nd respondent also handed over a diary affixed with a photograph of the first respondent. On 05.04.2004, the petitioner lodged a Police complaint. According to the petitioner, the family members of the first respondent used to abuse the petitioner and beat the petitioner. The 1st respondent deserted the petitioner from 08.06.2002. The petitioner submit that due to the above stated reason, it is not possible for the petitioner to live with the first respondent. Hence, he has filed the petition for divorce.

5. The brief facts and case of the first respondent/wife are as follows:

The first respondent/wife admitted the marriage. The 2nd respondent is an imaginary person. The first respondent has no intimacy with the 2nd respondent. The first respondent has not stated that she married the petitioner on compulsion. The allegations that the first respondent used to quarrel with the petitioner often and threatened him by saying that she will commit suicide and the first respondent used to go to her parent's house often are all denied as false. The father of the respondent is maintaining a diary and it will show the true events. Soon after the marriage the family members of the petitioner began to harass the respondent demanding dowry. The petitioner never objected his parents demanding dowry. The petitioner was always on tour outside the Tamil Nadu. When the petitioner was sick, the first respondent was not i