The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appellant failed to prove desertion and cruelty, and the marriage had not irretrievably broken down.

1. Heard Sri Akhilesh Tripathi, learned counsel for appellant, Sri Anil Kumar for the respondent wife and perused the record carefully.

2. By means of the instant first appeal under section 19 (1) of the Family Court Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred as 1984 Act), plaintiff-appellant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 10.07.2007 passed by Sri Ravindra Nath Kakkar, Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar, dismissing the Suit No. 15 of 2001 for divorce instituted by plaintiff-appellant against defendant-respondent. The relief sought by the appellant is that this Court may be pleased to allow the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree dated 10.07.2007, passed by the Family Court decreeing the aforesaid suit for divorce, with cost.

3. Before proceeding to decide the appeal on merit, both the parties were suggested by this Court to reconcile their dispute amicably and so, they were directed to appear in person on 9th September, 2012. Learned counsel for parties were also asked by this Court to exercise their good offices to settle the dispute. However, the effort for conciliation failed as is evident from the following order passed by this Court :

"Pursuant to the order dated 28th August, 2012 the parties appeared in person. The learned counsel for the parties made a joint effort for conciliation but they could not succeed.

The mater was taken up in chambers and was discussed with the parties. It seems that there is no possibility of any conciliation between the parties. The parties are not required to appear in person any more.

Let the matter be listed on 3rd October, 2012. In the meantime, the learned counsel for the parties may file their respective number of paper books."

4. Marriage of plaintiff-appellant and defendant-respondent was solemnized on 29.04.1993 as per Hindu rites. They were blessed with two female children on 06.08.1996 and 10.11.1999. At the time of marriage, appellant was unemployed and got employed in Railway Service in year 1996, while defendant-respondent was already selected in year 1990 before her marriage as Scientist in Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur, but chose to be appointed later in year 1992 and is working as such. Defendant-respondent is M.Sc. Ph.D. whereas, appellant is presently posted as Deputy Chief Engineer in North East Frontier Railway at Gauhati (Assam) since December, 2000. Before that, he was posted as Executive Engineer at New Jalpaiguri, West Bengal.

5. On 31.03.2001, plaintiff-appellant filed Marriage Petition No. 15 of 2001 for divorce before Family Judge, Vth Additional District Judge, Jalaun at Orai alleging therein that defendant-respondent is living separately having no physical or emotional relationship of any kind with him, though appellant made bona fide and sincere efforts to seek his transfer to U.P. for pursuing her to live with him, but his efforts failed. Contrary to it, defendant-respondent never made any effort to live with him. Hence, appellant was compelled to file Marriage Petition No. 15 of 2001 giving rise to present appeal.

6. Before Family Court following three issues were framed to decide aforesaid marriage petition:

Whether defendant has deserted plaintiff since 1999, about for two years, as alleged in suit? It yes, its effect?

Whether plaintiff has deserted defendant for any justifiable cause, as alleged in suit? If yes, its effect?

Whether plaintiff is entitled to any other relief?

7. Issues Nos. 1 and 2 were decided together as they are related to each other. Court below has noted in its judgment, the allegation made by defendant, that plaintiff appellant was aggrieved with birth of two daughters and wanted a son, therefore, started her harassment mentally, physically and economically. He also pressurized her to leave service, although defendant wife was in service much before her marriage though appellant got employment