Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.

1. In this Appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 the appellant is aggrieved by the dismissal of his suit for grant of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act').

2. The suit was preferred on the ground that the parties were married at Rajnandgaon on 11.5.1994. After 5-6 months of the marriage, the respondent/wife joined the service as Nurse in the Department of Health without consent of the appellant. In June, 1996, she lodged a false criminal complaint case before the JMFC, Durg against the husband and his relatives for offence under Sections 498-A, 493, 494, 495 and 496 of the IPC. She also indulged in making false and reckless allegations of performing second marriage by the appellant. She has deserted the appellant for more than 2 years and they have not cohabited since after February, 1995. By amending and inserting para-4A and 4B in the plaint, it was stated that at about 5.30 pm on 9.9.2009 the respondent with two of his nephews namely, Samir Rajput and Sanju Rajput misbehaved, manhandled, abused and assaulted the appellant causing injuries over his head and arm. The incident having occurred at a public place, the appellant's reputation suffered severe jolt. 3. It was also pleaded that the respondent/wife made a false and concocted complaint before the Human Rights Commission, Raipur on 15.9.2009 alleging that it was the appellant who manhandled her on 9.9.2009 threatening that he would abduct and prepare blue film of her daughter. She also alleged that her two nephews were arrested and severely beaten in the jail under the instructions from the appellant to the other jail inmates. According to the appellant, the above allegations were indecent, vulgar, false and defamatory. The appellant being a tax practitioner does not know any criminal so as to pass on instructions and that he cannot even dream of uttering words which are mentioned in the complaint in respect of his own daughter. These allegations by the respondent in the complaint before the Human Rights Commission amounts to cruelty.

4. The respondent denied the plaint allegations on pleading inter alia that it was the appellant who arranged job for the respondent and criminal complaint was lodged because she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty by the appellant and his parents. She stated that the appellant has performed second marriage with one Nisha Thakur of Chhuria, District Rajnandgaon on 24th May, 1996 and has two children out of the said second marriage. She reiterated the contents of the complaint made by her to the Human Rights Commission. She denied that she has deserted the appellant by stating that after her joining the service at Mungeli in February, 1995, the appellant used to meet her at Mungeli. She would also state in her additional pleading that on demand made by the appellant's father, scooter was purchased for the appellant. She also stated that at the time of death of her father on 15.12.1995 neither the appellant nor his family members attended the funeral and other rituals.

5. The trial Court proceeded to consider two issues as to whether the respondent/wife has treated the husband with cruelty and has deserted him and further as to whether the appellant has performed second marriage. The trial Court has held that the respondent has not committed cruelty or desertion but the appellant has performed second marriage.

6. In course of recording of evidence, the appellant was examined as AW-1 denying in cross-examination that he has performed second marriage. He also denied that he or his family members were subjecting the respondent to cruelty. His witness (AW-2) Ashwini Singh speaks about the effort made by the appellant to bring back his wife, however, she denied to come back to her marital home.

7. On the other hand, the respondent examined herself as NAW-1 reiterating that the appellant has performed second marriage. She has produced the birth cert