JUDGMENT :

Goutam Bhaduri, J.

1. Heard.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment & decree dated 06.7.2017 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur C.G. in Civil Suit No.216-A/2014 whereby the application filed by the appellant/husband for grant of decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion, was rejected.

3. The appellant/husband pleaded that he was married to the respondent/wife on 31.01.1986 and stayed up till 15.9.2011. The husband is engaged in job of railway guard and it was stated that before filing of the divorce petition, the wife deserted the husband without any lawful cause, from 15.9.2011. The allegation is that wife had availed different loans to the extent of Rs. 10-12 Lacs, without the knowledge of the husband even by placing the ornaments which were meant for the marriage of their daughter as a pledge to different creditors. Further, the allegation which was also leveled against the husband that the husband was having illicit relation with one lady named Tulsa Mahobia, outside the marriage, consequently, it damaged the reputation of the husband in society, amounting to cruelty and therefore, the divorce was claimed for on these grounds.

4. The wife denied the allegations of the husband, instead it was stated that since she was subjected to torture for demand of dowry, she was forced to leave the matrimonial house, consequently, she was subjected to cruelty, by the husband. She further contended that an application was filed for maintenance, wherein the maintenance was granted in favour of the wife and she had never deserted the husband of her own but because of the torture meted out to her, she left the company. As a consequence, the husband would not be entitled for decree of divorce.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant/husband would submit that evidence in this case would reveal that the wife without the knowledge of the husband had pledged the ornaments which were procured for marriage of their daughter and he came to know about this fact when demands were made by different creditors. He would further submit that this act itself would amount to cruelty as the faith between the husband and wife was broken. He would further submit that in the proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., the allegation of illicit relation with one lady namely; Tulsa Mahobia was clamped against the husband which was a lie and was never proved, as such, the nature of allegation resulted in huge defamation of the husband in the society, on this ground also the husband was entitled for decree of divorce. He further submits that without any lawful reason, the wife left the company of the husband on 15.9.2011, therefore, both on the ground of cruelty and desertion, the learned Family Court, Bilaspur should have granted the decree of divorce. He further submits that the evidence adduced by the husband was also not appreciated in its proper prospective by the learned Family Court, Bilaspur as such the judgment and decree be set-aside and divorce be granted.

6. Per contra, Mr. Palash Rajani and Mr. Pankaj Bhaskar, learned counsel for the respondent/wife would submit that the order of the learned Family Court, Bilaspur is well merited. They would further submit that the judgment passed by the Judicial Magistrate in the proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. would reveal that the husband was in illicit relation with a lady namely; Tulsa Mahobia which was not rebutted. Consequently, there were sufficient reasons for the wife to leave the company of the husband and there was no willful desertion. They would further submit that the proceedings during the conciliation would also reveal that the wife was willing to join the company of the husband and therefore, the desertion was not proved. They would further submit that though the oral statements were made that the wife has obtained loan in absence of knowledge of the husband but this fact has not been proved before the Court and accordingly, the order of the learned Fam