Vinod K.Sharma, J.

1. This appeal by the appellant / wife is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Sonepat, allowing a petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (herein after referred to as the Act) for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce.

2. The respondent / husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act on the pleading, that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 29.4.1998 at Rohtak according to Hindu Rites and ceremonies. After the marriage the appellant started residing with the respondent in the matrimonial home at Ganaur and the marriage was duly consummated. The appellant resided with the respondent for five days at Ganaur and thereafter for a period of ten months in three spells at Madras. A female child namely Jyotisana, was born out of the said wedlock. It was the case of the respondent/husband that since 8.12.2002, the appellant was residing at Rohtak in her matrimonial home without the consent of the respondent. The father of the appellant had expired on 8.12.2002, and the appellant left the matrimonial home on that very day. It was also pleaded case of the respondent/husband, that from the first day of marriage the appellant did not pay any regard to parents of the respondent and other family members,

3. It was claimed, that the mother of the appellant is a very clever lady and was not allowing the appellant to reside in the matrimonial home. The appellant was said to have left the company of the respondent/husband without any reasonable cause.

4. Prior to filing of this petition the respondent had filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act in which the appellant refused to join the company of the respondent. The petition filed under Section 9 of the Act was thereafter dismissed in default on 7.10.2005.

5. It was pleaded, that the appellant had taken away all the valuable articles at the time of leaving the matrimonial home. The respondent further claimed, that twice panchayat was convened and efforts were made to settle the matter but the appelant refused to join the company of the respondent at Ganaur. It was claimed, that the appellant deserted the respondent/husband and that there were no chances of reconciliation now.

6. The petition was contested, wherein stand taken was that the appellant was thrown out of the matrimonial home in October, 2004 after giving merciless beatings. It was alleged, that the respondent and his family members were demanding dowry from the first day of the marriage. She also claimed, that she was subjected to harassment and torture for not bringing dowry. It was also the case of the appellant that the respondent as well as his family members had been beating the appellant by raising a demand of Rupees three lac for purchasing a car and another sum of rupees five lac for purchasing a house. The daughter of the parties, was born on 20.2.2001 at Rohtak. She was also residing with the appellant since her birth. It was denied, that the mother of the appellant was not allowing the appellant to live in the matrimonial home. The previous petition under Section 9 of the Act was dismissed on 12.5.2005 and an application for restoration was allowed on 14.9.2005, and the petition was again dismissed in default on 7.10.2005.

7. It was pleaded that the date 8.12.2002 was mentioned just to create ground of desertion. It was reiterated that the appellant was turned out of the matrimonial house in October, 2004 in only three wearing clothes along with her daughter. It was also pleaded, that the respondent had no cause of action to file the petition and further that the petition was not maintainable.

8. In the replication the averments made in the petition were reiterated and that of written statement were denied.

9. The learned matrimonial Court was pleased to frame the following issues :-

"1.Whether the petitioner is entitled for a decree of divorce on the grounds mentioned in the peti