The court considered the evidence and allegations of cruelty and desertion, and also the respondent's petition for restitution of conjugal rights, and concluded that the marriage should not be dissolved based on the allegations.

Satish Kumar Mittal, J.

1. Palwinder the husband has filed the instant appeal against the judgment and decree dated 24.7.1999 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Amritsar, vide which the petition filed by him against his wife Saroj under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion has been dismissed.

2. The marriage between the parties was solemnised on 26.6.1991. Out of this wedlock, two children were born, who are now 11 years and 9 years old. In the year 1996, the appeilant filed divorce petition against the respondent on the ground of cruelty and desertion. It was alleged that from the very beginning the behaviour and conduct of the respondent was harsh and cruel. She was pressuring the appellant to live separately from the join family and used to quarrel with him and his family members of flimsy matters. She did not cook the meals and did not wash the clothes of the appellant. She was under the influence of her mother and used to spend maximum time with her. It was further alleged that in October, 1995, the respondent took the minor daughter and other valuable ornaments and clothes with her and left the matrimonial house without informing the appellant. Since then, she is living separately and has deserted the appellant without any sufficient cause. It was further alleged that the respondent had also filed a false criminal complaint against the appellant, his parents, brothers, sister and brother-in-law under Section 406, 498-A IPC, in which the appellant and this family members were summoned. It was alleged that the aforesaid conduct and behaviour of the respondent caused mental and physical cruelty to the appellant.

3. Pursuant to the notice issued to the respondent, she appeared and contested the aforesaid petition filed by the appellant by denying all the allegations levelled against her. It was pleaded that the appellant and his parents were not satisfied with the dowry articles. In the month of September, 1996, the appellant and his family members compelled the respondent to bring more dowry, failing which she was threatened not to be allowed to reside with the appellant. When the respondent tried to persuade them, she was mercilessly beaten and she alongwith her minor daughter was thrown out of the matrimonial home. Since then, respondent is living separately with her mother as inspite of the consistent efforts made by her family members she was not allowed to join the matrimonial home. It was alleged that it is the appellant, who is guilty of cruelty and he cannot be allowed to take the benefit of his own wrong.

4. After considering the evidence led by both the parties, the learned trial court dismissed the aforesaid petition while holding that the appellant had failed to prove on record the alleged cruelty. It was also held that the appellant has failed to prove on record his desertion at the hands of his wife as she was residing separately from him for sufficient cause.

5. Mr. G.S. Mann, learned counsel for the appellant assailed the findings recorded by the learned trial Court on the issue of cruelty and desertion and contended that the learned trial Court has wrongly decided the aforesaid two issues against the appellant on the basis of misreading of the evidence led by the appellant and on the basis of wrong assumption of law as well as facts.

6. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the record of the case. In my opinion, there is no merit in the appeal filed by the appellant. The allegations of cruelty alleged by the appellant are of general nature. Merely because the respondent did not cook meals; did not wash clothes of the appellant; is a quarrel-some lady and used to quarrel with the appellant on petty matters, it cannot be concluded that on such allegations marriage between the parties should be dissolved on the ground of cruelty. The learned Additiona