Jitendra Kumar, J. – The present appeal has been preferred against the Judgment dated 19.12.2017 passed by Ld. Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarpur in Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No. 27 of 2017 whereby learned Family Court has dismissed the Matrimonial Case filed by the Appellant herein for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

2. The Appellant/Plaintiff has prayed for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty against the wife-respondent. It also transpires that despite service of notice, the respondent-wife did not appear before the Family Court and hence, she was proceeded ex parte. However, the Ld. Family Court dismissed the Matrimonial Petition of the Appellant/Plaintiff, ex parte, finding that the petitioner has failed to prove the allegation of cruelty allegedly committed by the respondent-wife against him.

3. The case of the appellant/plaintiff as per the pleading is that marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 12.06.2015 at village Dhanaur, district- Muzaffarpur by Hindu rites and customs and after marriage, the respondent-wife joined the appellant-husband at his matrimonial home and after living at the matrimonial home for 1-2 months, went back to her parental house. It is further alleged that during her stay at matrimonial home, her conduct was not proper towards his parents and other members of his family. It is also alleged that the respondent-wife does not have mental balance and she refused to cohabit and consummate the marriage saying that she has not married for making a family but to break her virginity. It is also alleged that during her stay at her matrimonial home some people from her village used to meet her in a closed room despite objections from the family members of the appellant. When she was asked about the meeting by family members, she used to abuse them saying that they had no business to know about the said meeting. It is also alleged that he visited the parental house of the wife several times to take her back to his matrimonial home but she refused to join him at the matrimonial home. It is further alleged that during her stay at parental home, she informed the appellant-husband about her ill health and asked him for money for treatment. Hence, the appellant-husband took the respondent-wife to Dr. Smt. Vidya Singh at Muzaffarpur for her treatment. As per the advice of the said doctor, ultrasonic test of her uterus was done on 29.07.2016 and as per the report, the respondent-wife has cyst in her uterus and she is not having eggs in the uterus and therefore, there is least possibility of her becoming a mother. However, as per the pleading, the petitioner-husband is a young man of 24 years of age having good health needing cohabitation and having desire to become a father but the respondent-wife is neither willing to cohabit nor is any possibility of her becoming a mother. It is further alleged that she always used to demand money and on refusal she used to threat to commit suicide and implicate the whole family of the appellant in dowry case to send them to jail. Hence, the appellant and his family members do not feel safe to keep her at matrimonial home.

4. Despite service of notice, the respondent-wife preferred not to appear before the Family Court. Hence, she was proceeded ex parte.

5. The appellant/plaintiff examined two witnesses including himself before the Family Court in support of his petition for divorce. The appellant/plaintiff has examined himself as PW-1 deposing that during her stay at the matrimonial home, the wife refused to cohabit with him saying that she has not married for family but for breaking her virginity and she went back to her parental home after two months and despite several visits by the appellant to her parental home, she refused to come back to the matrimonial home and to establish physical relationship with him. It is also deposed that as per desire of the respondent-wife she was taken to Dr. Smt. Vidya Singh for