Shaji P. Chaly, J.

The above appeal is filed by the Respondent against the judgment of the Family Court, Nedumangad in O.P.No.574 of 2008 dated 26.09.2012, whereby the Family Court allowed the Original Petition filed by the 1st Respondent herein, seeking dissolution of the marriage on the ground of cruelty. During the pendency of this appeal, 1st Respondent died and consequently additional Respondents 2 to 4 were impleaded by this Court as per its order dated 15.01.2015 and in spite of service of notice, none appeared either personally or through counsel to contest the proceedings.

2. Brief facts required for the disposal of the appeal discernible from the Original Petition are as follows:

3. The appellant and the 1st Respondent are Hindus and their marriage was solemnized as per the custom, rituals and ceremonies prevailing in the community on 30.08.2002 at Nirmala Kalyana Mandapam, Kazhakoottam. Thereafter, they resided in the house of the 1st Respondent. According to the 1st respondent, at the time of marriage, the appellant was provided with 35 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs.50,000/- was given to the 1st Respondent as pocket money, by way of a cheque. The 1st Respondent spent the money for marital expenses and he gave a 'Thali Chain' to the appellant weighing 3= sovereigns and he gave a silk saree worth Rs.7,000/- on the day of marriage to the appellant. The entire gold ornaments belonging to the appellant were in her custody and 1st Respondent had never any opportunity to handle them.

4. It is further contended by the Respondent that after the marriage, the appellant was taken to the family house of the 1st Respondent and they started to live as husband and wife. The marital life was not at all happy or a contented one. The appellant started quarrel from the first day of the marriage itself. There was a marriage party at the residence of the 1st Respondent on the date of marriage and the friends and relatives of the 1st Respondent attended the party in the evening. They were all eager to mingle with the appellant, but the appellant stood idle and she behaved like a stranger as if to appear that she was against the party going on there. This kind of behaviour from the part of the appellant gave much mental pain to the 1st Respondent and during the same night when all the visitors left the place, the 1st Respondent when asked about the unmindful attitude of the appellant, the appellant with utmost irritation replied that the 1st Respondent is unnecessarily spending money for conducting party instead of buying a good 'Thali Chain' or saree for the appellant and this reply given by the appellant gave much mental pain and tension to the 1st Respondent.

5. It is the further contention of the 1st Respondent that through out the marital life, the appellant used to quarrel with the 1st Respondent stating that the 'Thali chain' put by the 1st Respondent was not up to the mark and the saree bought by him was very bad. The appellant never showed any kind of love and affection towards the 1st Respondent and she did everything like a machine and element of love was lacking in her approach and behaviour. Even though the 1st Respondent provided everything to the appellant as a dutiful husband, she behaved rudely and vehemently and she was inimical towards the 1st Respondent for reasons best known to her. It is also the contention of the 1st Respondent that the appellant used to quarrel with the 1st Respondent stating that the family house of the 1st Respondent is a den and there is not even electricity connection to use mixie, grinder, electric iron etc. and further that there is no gas connection and other modern equipments for a decent life. It is the case of the 1st Respondent that being a lower grade servant in the Government service, he was not able to provide all those facilities at a stretch. Even though the 1st Respondent tried to make the appellant understand his inability to provide those modern facilities, the appell