Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge.

This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 6.7.2012 passed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Shimla in H.M.A. Petition No. 26-S/3 of 2007.

2. “Key facts” necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that appellant has filed petition for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. According to him, the marriage was solemnized with respondent on 22.10.1992 at village Maheshu according to Hindu rites and local customs. One daughter Kumari Neha was born on 6.9.1993. Respondent was uncaring, rude and cruel towards appellant as well as his other family members. The conduct of the respondent remained the same for 14 years. Respondent insisted for separate residence. Respondent took his daughter to her parental house and he brought them back in the month of May, 1994. Many efforts were made by the appellant and his family members to resolve the issue. He filed an application for judicial separation against the respondent. He withdrew the same on 7.7.1997. Respondent filed petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights on 12.8.1997. The same was decreed by Senior Sub Judge, Shimla on 31.7.2002. Respondent also filed an application under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 10.9.2002 against the appellant.

It was allowed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class (4), Shimla on 18.1.2006. Respondent has also filed complaint in the Himachal Pradesh Women Commission in the year 2002. Respondent started residing separately in one of the rooms in the house without interacting with any member of the family of the appellant. Respondent on 14.6.2003 has also lodged report against the brother and sister-in-law of the appellant. Case was also registered against the appellant under sections 498-A, 323 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Behaviour of the respondent has always remained cruel towards appellant. She has deserted the appellant. Acts of respondent has caused physical and mental cruelty to him.

3. The petition was resisted by respondent. According to respondent, she was ready and willing to live with appellant. According to respondent, it is the appellant, who has deserted her. She had been very respectfully, caring and devotional towards appellant. According to respondent, appellant had been threatening to contract second marriage. Income of appellant’s family was sufficient. She never refused to work with the family members of appellant.

4. No rejoinder was filed by appellant. Issues were framed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Shimla on 6.6.2008. He dismissed the petition on 6.7.2012. Hence, the present appeal.

5. Mr. Atul Jhingan has vehemently argued that the Additional District Judge has misconstrued and misread the oral as well as documentary evidence led by the parties. According to him, appellant has proved that the actions of respondent constituted physical as well as mental cruelty. He has also argued that respondent has deserted his client.

6. Mr. G.D. Verma, learned Senior Advocate has supported the judgment passed by the Additional District Judge.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully.

8. Appellant Avtar Singh has led his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW-8/A. He has reiterated the contents of petition. In his cross-examination, he has admitted that they remained together for one year. One daughter was born out of the wedlock. He took respondent to her parental house after the birth of daughter. Thereafter, she came after sometime. He has admitted that respondent used to do household work alongwith her family members. He has admitted that he had filed petition for judicial separation and respondent had filed petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act against him. He has also admitted that respondent has filed petition for maintenance under section 125 of the Cod