Mr. Yogesh Khanna, J.

1. The appellant and the respondent entered into marital bond on March 12, 2004 in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies in Delhi. Their relations soon became sour and the respondent herein filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of HM Act alleging that there has always been a demand of dowry from the side of the appellant and that he took away all her money; used to lock her in the room before leaving for his job; beat her and ridicule her before his friends. As facts goes, immediately after their marriage, they both shifted to District Kannaur, Himachal Pradesh where the appellant was serving as an assistant teacher in Central School, at Recknong Peo, District Kinnaur, Himachal Pradesh. They lived there till May 27, 2004 when the respondent returned to Delhi to stay with her parents. The appellant also resigned and came to Delhi. On December 26, 2004 a male child was born to them.

2. They both got job as teachers in Delhi and went on to live in a rented house in Saad Nagar, Delhi for some time. Then they shifted to a rented house at Dwarka, Delhi. However, per allegations of the respondent herein there was no change in the behaviour of the appellant, who allegedly used to take drinks; beat her and that on August 07, 2009 left the respondent in her matrimonial home and took away his son to stay with his parents at village Jonti, Delhi. He also took away all her belongings and household items. Though, he returned at night, but left the next day i.e. on August 08, 2009, never to join the company of his wife and that she lived all alone thereafter. The respondent was always apprehensive of the appellant that he may end her life.

3. The appellant in his pleadings denied allegations of cruelty and rather alleged that the issues were trivial arising out of child care, upbringing, interference of her parents, her repeated demand to live near her parents, her refusal to take care of the respondent’s elderly and ill parents etc. The appellant stated that he performed all his martial obligations whole heartedly towards his wife and in-laws and did whatever was expected of a husband and that he always took care of his wife and son and since he is a heart patient, the respondent herein was getting rid of him by filing divorce.

4. The appellant herein examined himself as RW1; whereas the respondent herein examined herself as PW1. In their evidence each of them denied allegations made against each other and rather espoused their cause.

5. The respondent as PW1 reiterated the averments made in her pleadings and deposed about demand of diamond ring, an Ascent car by the appellant and his family members. She deposed that on March 17, 2004 they shifted to District Kinnaur, Himachal Pradesh, where appellant was posted as an Assistant Teacher and that he took all her belongings; did not give her pocket money; used to lock her in house while going to his job; beat her mercilessly; used to boost about his relationship with other ladies etc. She further deposed that on April 17, 2004 she came to Delhi to appear in an examination and while returning to District Kinnaur on May 01, 2004, she constantly was vomiting in the bus but the appellant sat on another seat and did not even ask her for any medicine or tea.

6. The respondent also deposed that appellant used to cast aspersions on her character and used to remark that she looks like mother of two kids and definitely had physical relations with someone. He used to comment that she is worst than whore. The respondent also deposed that her father purchased her a LIG flat at Sector 2, Rohini for Rs. 6.40 Lac, which they sold and then purchased a flat at Dwarka in the joint names of the appellant and the respondent and even at that time her father contributed Rs. 2.60 Lac. However, the appellant did not return the money to her father.

7. She further deposed that both of them got employed in Delhi and shifted to rented accommodation in Gali No.2, Saad Nagar, New