Judgment Bhagwati Prasad, J.-Heard 2. This appeal is filed against the refusal of application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The trial Court has not accepted the plea of husband that desertion was committed by the wife. Their marriage was solemnized on 211.1996 and the desertion is alleged to have taken place 312.1996 which is below two years as required under Section 13(1)(b) of the Act. Therefore, the trial Court was not persuaded to grant the decree of judicial separation. The second ground of divorce as prayed for was cruelty. The fact of cruelty is also based on the assertion is that the wife has got the pregnancy aborted without the permission of the husband. 3. The case of the wife was that she did not make any efforts for abortion but it took place because of health reasons. The trial Court has not accepted the story of the husband that she has got the pregnancy aborted. There is no evidence to that effect that abortion was conducted medically by some external aid. In absence of such evidence, the trial Court has not accepted that the abortion was doing of the wife. 4. Learned Counsel for the appellant further stressed that since the wife has deserted him and she has deprived the husband of matrimonial pleasures, therefore, cruelty has been committed. 5. As the story goes, the respondent wife was turned out by the husband. Letters written by the husband Exhibit-A/1 and Exhibit A/2 speaks different that what has been claimed by the appellant for judicial separation. They speak of very cordial relationship between the husband and the wife. 6. Learned Counsel for the respondent urged that the relationship between the husband and wife is exhibited by Exhibit-A/1 and Exhibit-A/2. The petition for judicial separation has been filed by the appellant with ulterior motive. The actions committed by the appellant are good enough to induce in the mind of the Court that it was the doing of the husband that has brought in discordant relations between the appellant and wife. He cannot be permitted to take advantage of his own wrongs. Therefore, the appeal for grant of judicial separation is dismissed. More particularly, in view of the fact that the decree for restitution of conjugal rights having been passed, no attempts have been made by the husband. He cannot be permitted to take advantage of his own wrongs. Therefore, the appeal for grant of judicial separation is dismissed. More particularly, in view of the fact that the decree for restitution of conjugal rights having been passed, no attempts have been made by the husband. He is defying the orders of the Court and he is out and out to break the relationship. There is no force in the appeal. The appeal is hereby dismissed.