JUDGMENT : P. SOMARAJAN, J. 1. The husband in a matrimonial dispute came up with this appeal at the age of 71 years against his wife who is aged 62 years, aggrieved by the judgment in O.P. No. 234/2008 of the Family Court, Kasaragod, rejecting his application for getting divorce. 2. Admittedly their marriage was solemnized on 30.04.1966 and having two female children born in the wedlock. Both of them are retired school teachers. The ground raised is the cruelty and desertion. It is after the retirement there arose difference of opinion as the wife, who is the respondent, started to harass the petitioner. Now he is aged 81 years (at the time of appeal 71 years) and is suffering from various ailments. But the respondent/wife left the company of the petitioner on 01.12.2004 and started to live with her daughter. 3. The petitioner gave oral evidence as PW-1 and the respondent gave oral evidence as RW-1 and got examined four other witnesses as RWs. 2 to 5 and got marked exhibits B1 to B13. 4. The main allegation raised is that after the retirement, the behaviour of the respondent/wife became intolerable and she even did not care to look after her husband who was suffering from various ailments after his retirement. On the other hand, the stand taken by the respondent/wife is that he is a selfish man right from his youth and never cared about the welfare of his wife and children. She has been subjected to cruelty even in the early days of marriage. This would sufficiently show the strained relationship between the petitioner and the respondent. In the Lower Court they were actually cursing each other for their respective attitude and behaviour right from the early days of marriage, though they managed to live together till their retirement. By that time two daughters born in the wedlock. Persistent intolerance minted with hatredness in their daily life is well explicit from the respective oral evidence adduced by the parties, besides the documentary evidence. Attempt to settle the dispute on mediation also failed which has resulted in various applications for maintenance and exchange of respective wild allegations followed by actions. Cruelty, one or other way, from the respective sides is also well evident and it was aggravated after his retirement when he was in need of care from his wife on account of his ailment and old age. Cruelty, one or other way, from the respective sides is also well evident and it was aggravated after his retirement when he was in need of care from his wife on account of his ailment and old age. The nature of allegation levelled against by the wife would prima facie show that he had been left out without giving proper care or attention at the time when he was in need after his retirement. The fact that she had deserted her husband and living with her daughter after his retirement would be self sufficient to show the attitude of the respondent/wife towards her husband. The nature of allegations raised by the respondent portraying him as a selfish guy even at his youth and continuance of the relationship with him as husband and wife till retirement would sufficiently tell upon what is behind it. Hence, the view taken by the Lower Court by rejecting divorce cannot be sustained. Sufficient reasons were brought out, hence Lower Court ought to have granted divorce of the marriage. 5. Mat. Appeal is allowed. The order of the Lower Court is set aside. The marriage of the petitioner with the respondent is hereby dissolved by way of divorce with effect from today. No order as to costs.