SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent. By consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing and disposal.

2. The marriage of the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 8.12.2009 at Mumbai as per Hindu Vehicle Rites. It is the case of the respondent that the appellant who was his wife, treated him with cruelty, hence, the respondent filed a petition i.e. Petition No. A-419 of 2011 for divorce on the ground of cruelty. The said petition came to be allowed by the Family Court, Mumbai by judgment and order dated 19.12.2012. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal has been preferred.

3. It is an admitted fact that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent took place on 8.12.2009 at Mumbai as per the Hindu Vedic Rites. The case of the appellant is that the respondent was the daughter of his maternal uncle. There was love affair between both of them and they had even shared physical intimacy prior to the marriage.

4. In order to show that the wife treated him with cruelty, the respondent husband relied on the following instances:

(i) After the marriage both the appellant and the respondent went to Mahabaleshwar for honeymoon for four days and three nights. According to the husband, he made attempts to consummate the marriage but the wife refused to allow him to touch her body. Hence, on coming back from honeymoon, he complained to the father of the wife about this fact.

(ii) The second incident relied upon by the husband is that on 24th, 25th and 26th January, 2010 the wife went to Nashik for office work in spite of being advised not to do so as they were newly married. But the wife went out of Mumbai on her office work. The further case of the husband is that the wife used to wear shirt and pant while going to the office which was not liked by him. She used to pick up quarrels with him and his parents and she never gave respect to his parents.

(iii) Another incident relied upon by the husband to show that he was treated cruelly by the wife, is that on 2.2.2010 his wife returned home from office at 10.00 p.m. The respondent tried to convince the wife to behave in a proper and dutiful manner. Thereupon, she picked up quarrel and pushed the husband and started to collect her clothes and belongings in order to go to her parents house. At that time, the husband and his parents convinced her and she stayed the night. On the next day, the husband and his parents called her parents and her parents convinced her. Thereafter on 8.2.2010 the wife of her own accord, left the matrimonial home along with her parents. This is sum and substance of the allegations of the husband on the point of cruelty.

5. In order to prove the cruelty, the husband has examined himself and the wife has also examined herself. No other witnesses were examined by the parties.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant pointed out that the allegations made by the husband regarding picking up of quarrels and not giving respect to his parents, are found to be vague and no material particulars have been given by the respondent in relation to these allegations. The main ground to prove cruelty which has been stated by the husband, is that soon after marriage when they went for honeymoon to Mahabaleshwar for four days and three nights, he made attempts to consummate the marriage but the wife refused to allow him to touch her. According to the husband, this non-consummation of marriage at the time of honeymoon caused him tremendous cruelty. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the husband that failure to comply with one of the essential obligations of the marital life by a spouse, would amount to subjecting the other to cruelty. It is one of the essential and principal obligations on the part of the spouse to satisfy the sexual urge of the other, which is natural instinct. Married life without a sexual life will be a curse. Normal sexual life cannot be dese