G.C. Garg, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated January 13, 1992 whereby a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the appellant -husband has been dismissed.
(2.) THE case as set up by the appellant in the petition is as under : The parties were married at Hoshiarpur on October 14, 1988. On the very first night at about 10.30 p.m. the young couple went to their bed on the second floor of their house, but the respondent came running to the ground floor and expressed her desire to sleep in a separate room. The appellant noticed abnormality in her behaviour and temperament, She used to be extremely happy at one time and depressed the next moment without any reason. Two days after the marriage, the couple was travelling in a bus for going to Sukhna Lake when the respondent jumped out of the bus when it was in motion. In February, 1989 the respondent told the appellant that she was against her marriage but her parents had forcibly married her off. The respondent was found to be having short memory as she would not switch off the press after ironing the clothes and would bolt the door from outside when the family members were sitting in. Once she was taken to the Health Centre in connection with some gynae problem and was advised some oral pills which were not to be consumed but she was swallowed the whole stock of tablets. The mental illness and erratic behaviour were brought to the notice of her parents who admitted this fact and told that one Jyotshi had informed then that she would be alright after the marriage. While under attach, she used to be very excited, restless, emotional quarrelsome and violent. She also used to damage furniture, crockery and other articles lying in the house. The respondent was taken to CMC Hospital on December 10, 1988 and to the Post -graduate Institute, Chandigarh on December 12, 1988 and despite regular treatment there was no change in her behaviour and she could not distinguish between right and wrong. She used to run out of the house very late in the night and in the month of February, 1989, she was brought back from outside at about mid -night by the appellant and his parents in the presence of R.K. Puri and Surinder Khanna. She threatened to commit suicide and to involve the appellant and his family members which caused mental torture to the appellant. On April 5, 1989, she was taken to Hoshiarpur by her parents. The matter was taken to the Saini Sabha Nawanshahar in June, 1989 and after recording the evidence, the Sabha concluded that the respondent was suffering from mental disorder. It had, therefore, become impossible for the appellant to live with the respondent because of her conduct and behaviour. On the above facts, the petition for divorce had been filed by the appellant -husband on December 22, 1990. The respondent by filing a written statement asserted that the above allegations were baseless and had been levelled in order to get a decree of divorce. The respondent specifically denied that she is suffering from any mental disorder. She specifically took a stand in the written statement that she was taken to the CMC Hospital and the Post -graduate Institute by the appellant just to create evidence. She further stated that she was perfectly a normal human being and, therefore, there was no question of any abnormal behaviour on her part. Appellant controverted the allegations of the respondent by filing replication. On the respective pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed : (1) Whether the respondent is suffering from mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner cannot be expected to live with her ? OPP. (2) Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of two years proceeding the presentation of the present petition ? OPP. (3) Relief. The Trial Court after considering the evidence led before it, answered both the issues against the appellant. Issue No. 1 was decided by observing that the evidence as had come on the record failed to prove that the respondent was suffering from mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that it was not safe for the appellant to live with the respondent. Under issue No. 2, it was found that the statutory period of desertion of two years was not over when the petition for divorce was filed. Resultantly, the petition was dismissed. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the husband -appellant has filed the present appeal.
(3.) FROM the pleadings in the divorce petition, it is apparent that the petition is one falling under the second limb of Clause (iii) of Sub -section (1) of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Before going ahead, it will be appropriate to notice the provisions aforesaid, which read as under : "13. Divorce - -(1) Any marriage solemnized, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, may, on a petition presented by either the husband of the wife, be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party - - (iii) has been incurably of unsound mind, or has been suffering continuously or intermittently from mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent. Explanation - - -In this clause: (a) the expression "mental disorder" means mental illness, arrested or incomplete development of mind, psychopathic disorder or any other disorder or disability of mind and includes schizophrenia ; (b) the expression "psychopathic disorder" means a persistent disorder or disability of mind ("whether or not including sub -normality of intelligence) which results in abnormally aggressive or seriously irresponsible conduct on the part of the other party, and whether or not it requires or is susceptible to medical treatment;" Before going into the merits of the case, it is necessary to construe the second limb of Clause (iii) of Sub -section (1) of Section 13 ibid, vis -a -vis the facts of the present case. Accordingly, it is necessary for the appellant to show in the first place that the wife has been suffering continuously or intermittently from mental disorder. Secondly, it must also be shown by him that the mental disorder of the respondent is of such a kind and to such an extent that he cannot reasonably be expected to live with her. So, only one element is sufficient and both conditions must be satisfied to get a decree of divorce.;