life. Since she was employed she behaved adamantly with a rigid face. The attitude of the appellant caused mental agony to the respondent. Since the appellant/wife was a Manager in the Bank, the respondent took care of the appellant in all manner and he took up the family responsibility. When the appellant was conceived, the respondent allowed her to stay with her parents and from there, she went to her job. Though the respondent informed about his circumstances that he could not leave his aged and sick mother alone, the appellant/wife insisted the respondent to come and live with her in her parent's house. On 29.12.2011 the appellant/wife gave a complaint against the respondent/husband and his mother before the District Social Welfare Officer, Tirunelveli stating that she was asked to enter the kitchen only after taking bath and she was insisted to take the first month salary after keeping the same in the Pooja room and she was insisted to do the household works. On 06.10.2011, the District Social Welfare Officer, Tirunelveli advised the appellant/wife to live with the respondent, but the appellant/wife wanted to live with the respondent separately. During counseling the appellant/wife told that she was not willing to live with the respondent, which caused mental agony to the respondent. The appellant/wife has also filed M.C.No.4 of 2012 before the Family Court and it was referred before the Lok Adalat. On hearing that the appellant gave birth to a male child, the respondent/husband tried to contact the appellant/wife over phone but the appellant threatened him that she would run away to some place out of his reach, if the respondent comes to see them. Though the respondent was willing to live with the appellant, the appellant refused to live with him. The respondent/husband was permitted to see his child at Salai Kumarasamy Temple at Tirunelveli junction. On 25.10.2012, the respondent went to see his child at the specified place and when he tried to talk with the appellant, the appellant conveyed that she was not interested to talk with the respondent/husband and left the place in a short period. Though the counseling was held for eight times before the Lok Adalat, no settlement was arrived before the Lok Adalat and the petition was remitted to Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirunelveli. On 31.05.2013, the appellant not pressed the application and the same was closed. Though the respondent had taken much efforts to live with the appellant, the appellant without any reason was living separately from the respondent. The respondent/husband sent a legal notice for reunion, but the appellant had not taken any steps to come and live with the respondent. Hence the respondent filed a petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion.
