I.S. Tiwana, J. - (1.) The marriage between the parties stands dissolved by a decree of divorce at the instance of respondent-husband. It has been granted on the ground that the decree obtained by the appellant- wife under section 9 for the restitution of conjugal rights on 21st March, 1977 remained unsatisfied for the statutory period of one year. The appellant assails this decree primarily on the ground that the trial court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record.
(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the parties to this litigation were married on 30th Sept., 1973 and a son named Parveen was horn on 20th Oct., 1974 out of this wed-lock. On 19th Sept., 1975, the respondent filed a petition under section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act (for short, the Act) for judicial separation. A contest having been raised by the appellant that the Court at Amritsar had no jurisdiction to try that petition, the same was dismissed on 6th Sept., 1976. Before the respondent-husband could initiate any other proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction, the appellant filed an application under section 9 of the Act on 16th Sept., 1976 at Ludhiana for the grant of a decree for (restitution of conjugal rights. An ex-parte decree to that effect was passed in her favour on 21st March, 1977.
(3.) Earlier on 25th Sept., 1976, the respondent-husband had filed an application under section 13 of the Act at Gurdaspur on 25th Sept., 1976, seeking a decree for divorce. The grounds pleaded for the grant of this decree were cruelty and desertion on the part of the respondent (now the appellant). That application, however, was dismissed on 20th Jan., 1978 on merits.;