Challenging the judgment and decree of divorce passed against her, the respondent in M.C.No.50/2014 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, JMFC, KGF has preferred this appeal.

2. The respondent was the petitioner and the appellant was the respondent in M.C.No.50/2014 before the Trial Court. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are henceforth referred to according to their ranks before the trial Court.

3. The petitioner and the respondent are Hindus.

Their marriage was solemnized on 26.04.2012 as per the customs of Hindu religion. Out of the said marriage, on

24.10.2013 son by name Kushal was born to the couple. 4. The petitioner filed M.C.No.50/2014 on

07.06.2014 under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘the Act’ for short) seeking decree for dissolution of marriage. In the petition he alleged that after marriage, he and the respondent were living together in his parental house at Bangarpet. Thereafter some quarrels cropped up between them. The respondent went to her parents’ house at Bangalore without informing him. In September, a panchayat was convened. In that panchayat the respondent demanded that the petitioner should separate from his parents and set up separate house. Since the mother of the petitioner is suffering from heart ailment, she needed his support. The respondent ill-treated him and his family members and threatened them of filing police complaint. Though she gave birth to son on 24.10.2013, the said fact was not informed to him. When he tried to see the son in the parental house of the respondent, they threw him out of the house and threatened him that if he comes again, police complaint will be filed. In May 2014, the respondent filed complaint before Bangarpet police in which the petitioner and his family members were summoned to the police station. In the police station, he was threatened that if he does not separate from his parents, he will be sent behind the bars. He claimed that such acts of the respondent amount to cruelty and sought decree of divorce.

5. The respondent contested the petition denying the allegations of cruelty, demand for setting up of separate house or demand to separate from his parents. She also denied the allegations of not informing about the birth of the son or throwing him out, when he visited her parental house for seeing the child or threatening him of filing police complaint. She contended that the mother and the sister of the petitioner subjected her to cruelty demanding dowry. She claimed that the petitioner’s sister quarreled with him demanding room occupied by the couple. Consequently, the petitioner himself came out of his parental house and set up house in Bangalore. Thereafter the petitioner abandoned her and joined his parents. When she tried to join him, she was thrown out and she was forced to take shelter in her parental house. On some mediation, when she was pregnant, she stayed five months in the house of the petitioner. The petitioner did not take care of her medical needs during her pregnancy. Even during that time, she was subjected to cruelty by the petitioner and his family members. Thereafter her parents took her back to their house. After delivery the petitioner at the instigation of his mother never bothered to visit her and see the child. The petitioner was employed in Railways and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. But he failed and neglected to maintain the respondent and her child. She is always ready and willing to join him. Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act contemplates grant of decree of divorce on the ground of incurable mental ill-health. The petition is liable to be dismissed as no such grounds were urged in the petition.

6. In support of his case, the petitioner got examined himself as PW.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P4. The respondent got examined herself as RW.1. No documents were marked on her behalf.

7. The Trial Court on hearing the parties by the impugned judgment and decree held that though the petition is purpo