JUDGMENT/ORDER :

1. This appeal has been preferred by the Applicant – husband under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1955) questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 26.11.2014 passed in Civil Suit No.16-A/2013, whereby the learned trial Court has dismissed his application seeking decree for dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion and cruelty. The parties to this appeal shall be referred hereinafter as per their description before the Court below.

2. Facts, which are essential to be stated for adjudication of this appeal, are that the marriage of the Applicant was solemnized with the Non-applicant – wife on 28.02.2008 in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals at Bhilai, Dist. Durg (C.G.). It is pleaded in the application that at the time of marriage, the age of the Non-applicant was suppressed by showing three years less than her actual age and her parents wanted to keep him as Gharjamai (a resident son-in-law). According to the Applicant, they lived only for 9 days in his house at Mahasamund and thereafter he got her admission in Shankaracharya B.Ed. College, Bhilai as per her wishes, where she stayed upto June 2009 for the purposes of completing her education and thereafter, they lived only one and half months at the place of his posting, i.e., Gariaband as she left the matrimonial home on 12.08.2009 without any intimation when he was not at home. Further contention of the Applicant is that a false criminal complaint has been lodged by his wife pertaining to demand of dowry, owing to which, an offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act has been registered against him in connection with Crime No.26/2011 causing mental cruelty to him, which compelled him for the initiation of the proceedings for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion as required under Section 13 (1) (ia) and (ib) of the Act, 1955, instituted on 07.05.2013.

3. While contesting the aforesaid claim, it is pleaded by Non-applicant – wife that after examining her educational certificates, the Applicant has got married with her, and therefore, the alleged allegation of suppression of her age is a false one. It is stated further that immediately 4 days after the marriage, her husband went to his place of posting without making any relations with her. It is pleaded further that her husband used to keep talking late night with other women and has extra-marital relations with her. It is pleaded further that since she was subjected to cruelty on account of demand of dowry, therefore, she was forced to lodge the alleged report against him.

4. In support, the Applicant has examined himself and his father Rajaram, while the Non-applicant has examined herself, father of her husband's concubine, namely, Murlidhar and also her father – Harinath Prasad in rebuttal.

5. After considering the evidence led by the parties, it was held by the trial Court that as the Applicant was found to be living with another woman, namely, Deepika Agrase, therefore, the Non-applicant was forced to live separately with justifiable reasons and in view thereof, the ground of desertion as alleged by the Applicant was not found to be established. It held further that the alleged complaint pertaining to the demand of dowry was not found to be a false one as alleged by the Applicant, and therefore, it cannot be held that the wife has committed cruelty with her husband entitling him to a decree for dissolution of marriage on the ground enumerated under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Act, 1955 as well. As a consequence of it, the trial Court has dismissed the claim, which has been impugned by way of this appeal.

6. Shri Manoj Paranjpe, learned counsel appearing for the Applicant – husband submits that the finding of the Court below holding that the Non-applicant has not deserted her husband and has not committed a cruelty upon him by lodging a complaint under