Sunil Gaur, J.

1. Vide impugned judgment of 24th December, 2011 appellant’s petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty stands dismissed by trial court while holding as under:-

“The above discussion shows that the pleadings of the petitioner lack in concrete, specific and material facts and they mostly consist of opinion and inferences. They cannot be termed as facts. The inherent defect of pleadings cannot be cured by any amount of evidence. The pleadings circumscribe the scope of evidence.”

2. The facts are not reproduced as they are already noticed in the impugned judgment. Respondent was served but none had appeared on behalf of respondent. It is so noted in the last order. It was submitted by learned counsel for appellant that respondent-wife was ex-parte before trial court as well and allegations of cruelty levelled against respondent are specific and in view of the unchallenged evidence on record, appellant ought to have been granted divorce. Thus, it is submitted that impugned judgment is unsustainable and deserves to be set aside.

3. Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned judgment and the evidence on record, I find that in the pleadings as well as in the evid