I. S. Tiwana, J. - (1.) The material he between the parties stands severed by the impugned decree of divorce granted against the appellant wife on the grounds of desertion and cruelty towards the respondent husband. He pleaded the following facts in his application under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for short, the Act).
(2.) At the time of their marriage on May 26, 1957. the respondent was working as a Research Scholar in the Chemistry Department of the Panjab University at Hoshiarpur and the appellant was employed as a teacher in a municipal school at that place. After the marriage, the parties lived together at Hoshiarpur till 1960 when the said department of the University was shifted to Chandigarh. The appellant continued to live at Hoshiarpur. A son was born to her on Jan. 2, 1961. The appellant continued to visit him at Chandigarh during vacantions or on other holidays but in spite of his insistence, did not shift to Chandigarh. During the year 1962, they jointly applied for her transfer to Chandigarh but to his titter surprise and dismay, she withdrew that application without taking him into confidence. In the year 1965 they along with the child went to England as he got a fellowship their at the University of Hull. On their return from U. K. in May, 1967, they lived together at Chandigarh for a short duration, i. e., the vacation of that year and after that the appellant resumed her duties as a Headmistress at Hoshiarpur. The respondent continued to live at Chandigarh along with the son Nalnish. This was the last living together of the parties and after that admittedly they have been living away from each other.
(3.) He also pleaded that he made repeated efforts to persuade the appellant to come and live with him at Chandigarh but never succeeded though she had been extending false promises to him. It was in 1978 that she finally and flatly refused to come to live with him. In support of his plea of cruelty he alleged that the appellant had a harsh tongue and would normally use obscene and offensive language towards him, his parents and other members of the family, she always had a cold and indifferent attitude towards him and his family members. She even did not write a letter of condolence when there was a death of a close relation of the respondent through of course after a great deal of persuation she agreed to accompany him to the place of the deceased.;