L/ --.b., pr Serial Date Order with Signature Office Note as to No. of of action (if any) Order Order taken on Order house. They have two children. The son who is 3j reading in class VII at present resides with Udai's sister and is looked after by the respondent. The daughter who studies in class VIII lives with her mother.The respondent used to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- to the petitioner during the pendency of the proceedings. There is an order of maintenance passed on 08.09.2006, by the same F`amily Court, wherein maintenance allowance of Rs.1,500/-was allowed, i.e., it was reduced by Rs.500/- from the amount which was being paid earlier when parties had gone to the marriage counsellor.Itappears that the said counsellor has found the parties to be incompatible and the marriage on the rocks. In paragraph 14 of the judgment under appeal, the Family Court has recorded as follows: -"14.Intheinstantcasefromthe evidence as borne out from the records, it is seen that there are allegations and counter allegations. Both parties accuse each other '€L*lJi, of being dnmk and. it appears that th petitioner used to leave home without th .----,.-------.-`-----. `,I, lJ that there is no substantial ground for the J pr+, Order with Signature Off ice Note as to action (if any) taken on Order petitioner not to live with the respondent and the facts as bone out by the records do not indicate that there was any cruelty meted out to the petitioner, which is more than the ordinary.wear and tear of married life. It may be recorded here that the demeanour of the petitioner during the entire proceedings have been of defiance and intolerance." The respondent has alleged that the petitioner is ofloose character and has said that she used to leave home for days on end, sometines for 11 days son;tFdre:giv3°#£a£ Any imputation of adultery fair/ and clear, using clear and unequivocal language, has not been made. It appears that the petitioner did leave the matrimonial home on her own sporadically even before they had started living separately finally. The petition has not been pressed on the ground of conversion of the respondent's religion. It is not a consent petition for divorce either. On the ground which is taken by the petitioner, i.e. cruelty, it is very difficult to find in the appellate Court that the husband acted in such manner, and is likely to act again in such manner that it d- Jet C."hi I) pr \`J, - 1 Order with Signature Office Note as to action (if any) taken on C)rder petitioner to stay with the respondent any more as his wedded wife. If the main divorce petition does not succeed it is n.ot possible for the maintenance petition to succeed on its own in a vacuum; as such, the appeal is dismissed and the judgment of the Family Court is upheld. There will be no order as to costs. th_ (A.N. Ray, CJ) T~i LLL-I-iuanal. / i . a )-