Ashok Kumar Gaur, J.

The present appeal has been filed by appellant-Smt. Geeta (wife) against the judgment and decree dated 21.11.2008 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Ajmer, whereby a decree of divorce was granted against the appellant.

2. The husband of the appellant viz. Raghuveer Singh-the respondent, filed an application under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for seeking a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The respondent pleaded in his application that he was married to appellant-Smt. Geeta on 09.07.1984 as per Hindu Rites. The appellant had left the matrimonial home on 26.07.1986 and since last 21 years she was residing with her own parents and she had deserted the respondent-husband without any justification. It was further pleaded in the application that the appellant-wife never made any efforts to restore the normal marriage relation for last so many years. The respondent-husband pleaded that the appellant had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., 1973 dated 29.04.1989 for claiming maintenance and in para-4 of her application, she levelled allegation about character of the respondent. It was further pleaded in the application that due to baseless and false allegations about character of the respondent, he suffered mental agony and his image was lowered down in the society and as such, mental cruelty was caused to him. The respondent also pleaded the fact of leaving matrimonial home without any reason and in spite of several persuasions, the appellant-wife refused to come to the matrimonial home.

3. The appellant-wife filed reply to the application raising preliminary objection of maintainability of said divorce petition on the ground of res judicata as earlier application under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (No.259/1988) was dismissed on 26.04.1985. It was pleaded that the respondent had forcibly turned her out from matrimonial home and she was staying not on her own but due to polluted environment created by the respondent. It was pleaded in para 8 of the reply that the respondent-husband had relation with other lady and on protest being raised by her, she was given beating and was turned out of matrimonial home.

4. The Court below on the basis of the pleadings framed following issues:-

1- vk;k izkFkhZ ds lkFk vizkFkhZ;k dk O;ogkj ;kfpdk esa of.kZr vk/kkjksa ij dzwjrkiw.kZ jgk gS\

2- vk;k izkFkhZ dk vizkFkhZ;k us fcuk fdlh ;qfDr ;qDr dkj.k ds nks o"kZ ls vf/kd vof/k ls ifjR;kx dj j[kk gS\

3- vk;k tokcnkos esa vafdrkuqlkj izkFkhZ dk izkFkZuki= jslT;wfMdsVk ds fl)kUr ds vk/kkj ij pyus ;ksX; ugha gS\

4- vk;k izkFkhZ vizkFkhZ;k ds fo:) fookg foPNsn dh fMdzh ikus dh vf/kdkjh gS\

5- vuqrks"kA

5. In support of divorce petition, the respondent produced 3 witnesses, AW-1 Raghuveer Singh (himself), AW-2 Hukam Singh (maternal grand-father of the appellant) and AW-3 Sohan Lal.

6. The appellant in support of her case produced herself as NAW-1 and Bhagwan Singh (NAW-2) (brother-in-law of the appellant) as well as NAW-3 Ved Prakash (neighbour of the appellant).

7. The court below on the basis of pleadings and evidence came to the conclusion that the issue No.1 relating to cruelty was proved by the respondent and it recorded a finding that the appellant-wife had levelled allegation of having illicit relation with one Premlata who was maternal grand-mother (naani) of the respondent. It was held that the respondent was brought up and got married by her maternal grand-mother and in support of such assertion, the husband of Premlata i.e. Hukam Singh (maternal grand-father) also gave statement that the allegation of illicit relation with Premlata was absolutely baseless. The court below found that the appellant miserably failed to prove that the respondent had any illicit relation with her maternal grand-mother and allegation about character of the respondent was absolutely false and without any foundation. It was found that false allegation about character assassination of a husband by a wi