IMPORTANT POINTS
Desertion--If a wife is working at a place which is far away, from the place of residence of her husband, and she is unable to come to the place of her husband daily, it would not be said that she deserted the husband.

Sham Sunder. J.:-This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.10.1999, rendered by the Court of District Judge, Chandigarh, vide which the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, filed by the appellant-petitioner, for dissolution of marriage was dismissed.

2. The facts, in brief, are that on 5.8.1984, the marriage between the parties was solemnized at Chandigarh, according to Anand Karaz ceremony. The parties cohabited, as husband and wife. From this wedlock one child namely Prabh Kiran Singh was born on 5.11.1986. At the time of marriage, the respondent was in service. After her transfer from Panchmari (M.P.) where the respondent was earlier posted, to Chandigarh she started residing at Mohali with her parents because both her brothers namely Amarjit Singh and Jaspal Singh were employed and residing outside Chandgiarh/Mohali. The mother of the respondent was a handicapped lady. Under these circumstances, the respondent insisted upon the petitioner, to live with her, at Mohali, in the house of her mother, so that they may be able to look after her. The appellant-petitioner however, did not accede to this demand of the respondent. The petitioner, at that time, was residing at Faridkot. He asked the respondent to leave her job and live with him at Faridkot. He was in a position to maintain her, as well as the child. He also told her that, in case, both of them lived together they could look after the child in a proper manner. The respondent, however, did not give heed to the request of the petitioner. On the other hand, she insisted upon him, to live with her, in the house of her parents, at Mohali. It was further stated that the respondent most of the time, used to reside at Mohali, with her parents. She rarely visited Faridkot. In vacations, she pressed the petitioner that he should join her in the house of her parents, but he again did not care. When the petitioner flatly refused the demand of the respondent, to live with her parents, at Mohali, he left the society of the petitioner, with a threat, that she would never come back to join him at Faridkot. As she was residing with her parents, at that time, she also took away with her the minor child. The petitioner waited for some time that the respondent would come and join him at Faridkot, but she did not come. After about a month, the petitioner went to Mohali to bring back the respondent-wife, but she flatly refused to join his society. Again after two months, the Panchayat consisting of the petitioner, his father, Gurdeep Singh and Pala -Singh s/o Kundan Singh and Manjit Singh s/o Jawala Singh went to the house of her parents. The Panchayat asked the respondent to accompany the petitioner, but she refused to accompany him. It was further stated that the respondent deserted the petitioner continuously since December, 1989, with an intention to put an end to the matrimonial ties, permanently. Ultimately, the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (amended up to date) was filed by the petitioner, in the Court of District Judge, Faridkot. It was, later on, transferred by this Court, to the Court of District Judge, Chandigarh.

3. The respondent, put in appearance, and filed written statement. It was pleaded that the petition had been filed after an undue delay, which remained un-explained, and, as such, was liable to be dismissed. The marriage between the parties was also admitted. It was also admitted that the parties cohabited as husband and wife. The birth of a child namely Prabh Kiran Singh, from this wedlock, was also admitted. It was stated that the respondent was working as Post Graduate Teacher, in Central School and was posted at Panchmari (M.P.) at the time of her marriage. She was transferred to Chandigarh on 5.9.1988. It was further stated that before the marriage, the father of the petitioner, namely Gurdeep Singh, represented to the father of the respondent, that the petitioner had through-out studied at