ORDER :

Heard.

1. This present appeal has been preferred by the Applicant/husband against the judgment and decree dated 31.12.2013 passed by the Family Court, Ambikapur, District Surguja in Civil Suit No.87-A/2011, wherein, the application filed by the husband seeking decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty against the wife was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is preferred by the husband.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the parties got married on 02.05.2009 and the husband sought for divorce on the ground that after the marriage, wife did not stay at her matrimonial home and without informing the husband often used to go away to her parental home. The allegation further made that immediately after the marriage, she washed away the vermilion and removed the bangles and having objected to that act of the newly wedded wife, she extended threat that she would commit suicide. Husband further alleges that she used to keep her menstrual clothes below her head and having objected to that, again threat was extended to commit suicide by consuming poison or jumping into a well. Husband also alleges that in odd hours, she used to live in the house in the company of one Dr. Khan and her cousin brother and having objected to that she used to shout and call the people. He further alleges that when she became sick, she refused to go for her treatment on the condition that she would only get treated by one Dr. Khan. The Husband further alleges that when he went out for the job work, and came back in the middle of the day for lunch, he frequently saw his wife in the company of one Dr. Khan and one day they were caught in a compromising position. Because of such illicit adulterous life led by the wife, mental cruelty was caused to the husband and it was difficult for him to stay, therefore, the decree of divorce was sought for.

3. On the contrary, the wife denied the adverse allegations and stated that after the marriage, they stayed together at village Godhanpur, for one year thereafter, in order to find out work for survival, the husband moved to Balrampur for 7 months and they stayed there and thereafter in Ramanujganj they stayed for 10 to 11 months. The wife further stated that the husband has deserted her and the allegation of demand of dowry was also made. In respect of the adulterous life, she denied the allegation. It was further stated that Rs.50,000/- was paid on demand made by the husband to purchase a motorcycle by the father of the wife. She further alleges that the husband extended threat to the wife to get a share from her father and all the adverse averments were denied.

4. On the basis of the pleading so made, the learned Family Court framed the issues of adultery and cruelty and after evaluating the evidence led by him, came to a conclusion that the allegations of adultery and cruelty have not been proved, therefore, the present appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant/husband would submit that to prove the evidence of adultery would be difficult and it has to be inferred by the circumstances. He referred to the evidence of husband (PW-1) and Rajkishore Sharma (PW-2), to submit that categorical statements were made by Rajkishore Sharma (PW-2) that the wife was caught in a compromising position with a third person. He would further submit that even the allegation of false demand of dowry was made, but, it has not been proved that alone itself would make out a case of cruelty. He would further submit that the learned Family Court though had admitted the averments of the husband, but at the same time refused to grant the decree of divorce, which is required to be corrected, in this appeal.

6. Per Contra, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent would submit that except bald allegation of adulterry and the cruelty, nothing has been proved. He further submits that the conduct of the husband itself would show that for intermittent period he was in the company of the wife and he himself has d