JUDGMENT

Faiza Tamby Chik J:

By a petition dated 23 June 1998, the petitioner had sought to dissolve the marriage which was contracted on 7 February 1991 on the basis that it had broken down irretrievably. The petitioner had alleged that the respondent had behaved in such a way that he could not reasonably be expected to live with her and that they had lived apart for at least a continuous period of two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition.

The respondent had in her reply to the petition made a series of allegation against the petitioner and had also prayed for financial relief under s. 60 of The Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 (Act 164) ('The Law Reform Act'). The petitioner had in his reply, strictly denied all the allegations made by the respondent.

Although the parties were legally married, the marriage was never solemnised according to Hindu custom owing to irreconcilable differences between the petitioner and the respondent which resulted in the parties living apart since the marriage and until the granting of the decree nisi. The marriage was never consummated and there were no children of the marriage.

However, the court had on 22 May 1