Lee Hun Hoe J:

The parties were married on 26 January 1951 according to the rites of the Methodist Church at Sungei Merah, Sibu. After the marriage they lived with the petitioner's parents for some time. Then they moved out and lived at various places until finally at 12, Raminway, Sibu. They have three children. The eldest is a girl and the two younger children are boys. Their ages are 17, 15 and 12 years respectively.

The petitioner charged the respondent with cruelty since marriage. Following an answer from respondent leave was obtained to amend para. 6 of the petition to the effect that there was a previous divorce proceeding in this Court in 1952. In that case (Sibu High Court Civil Case No. 61 of 1952) petitioner also charged the respondent with cruelty. On 28 August 1952 in a very brief judgment, Blagden J dismissing the petition observed:-

This is a sad case of two young people who should be happily married together but for some reason are not. There are undoubtedly faults on both sides but I am bound to say I think the majority of the faults lie on the wife's side."

Since then they came together again and had added two boys to the family. About sixteen years later the petitioner brings another petition against respondent and seeks to introduce incidents which were decided in 1952. I do think petitioner can do so by reason of res judicata. But he can adduce evidence of acts of cruelty after that period. In support of his charge of cruelty he pleaded 16 acts on the part of respondent which he alleged amounted to cruelty. Some of the allegations were abandoned as no reference was made or evidence called to support them.

The respondent denied all the charges against her and in her answer charged the petitioner with assaulting her and claimed for maintenance for herself and children. Petitioner admitted quarrelling with respondent on many occasions and assaulting her on one or two occasions. Respondent also admitted to quarrelling but denied injuring petitioner intentionally. Both admitted that every time they quarrelled they had patched up. According to petitioner the most serious incident occurred on 4 April 1967 when respondent threw empty bottles at him and the splinters from the bottles caused cuts on him which necessitated treatment in the hospital. Since that incident petitioner had left the matrimonial home and went to live with his mother. Respondent maintained that the injuries resulted accidentally.

Respondent admitted to locking herself up in petitioner's office on one occasion. She alleged that she had done so because petitioner had not given her the monthly housekeeping money. She said that the damage to the office machinery was due to her being pushed by petitioner when the machinery fell down. On that occasion she sustained a cut on her wrist when she hit a book case.

Wong Teck Sing (PW6) corroborated petitioner in some incidents but he was clearly biased. First he is the younger brother of petitioner and has demonstrated in no uncertain terms his dislike for respondent. Petitioner's mother also gave evidence. She told the Court how after each quarrel petitioner would come to her and seek her sympathy. Although her dislike for respondent is not as apparent as her younger son it is clear she is not very happy with respondent's conduct towards petitioner and herself. It was said that she tried to prevent the parties' friends from affecting a reconciliation but no evidence was adduced to support it. She thought the parties behaved like children. In fact she stated she wanted to see the parties live happily together.

Of the various incidents only in two which were alleged to have occurred in 1965 were independent witnesses called to give evidence. Both incidents were concerned with the petitioner being locked up in the bedroom. Song Ing Huo (PW3) stated that on 30 May 1965 he went to petitioner's office at 8.30 a.m. and waited till 10.00 a.m. but petitioner did not turn up. He wanted to see peti