Shrivastava, J. -- 1. This first appeal under section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act is at the instance of the husband challenging the judgment and decree dated 19th August, 2003 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Shujalpur, dismissing the Case No.2/2002.

2. The appellant had filed the application seeking divorce under section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, pleading that his marriage with the respondent was solemnised on 21.2.2000. After 5-6 months of the marriage, the respondent had started creating disputes. She used to abuse and insult the parents of the appellant and falsely tell her relatives that her in-laws were demanding dowry and torturing her. She had made a false report under section 498A of the IPC which had ended into compromise. One day she had started fighting on the old issues and had thrown Belan on the appellant and had said that she would commit suicide and send her in-laws to jail. On these pleadings, a prayer for grant of decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty was made.

3. The respondent by filing the written statement had denied the allegations by stating that she had always tried to keep her husband and his family members happy, but they used to mistreat her for not bringing the adequate dowry and Rs.10,000/-, colour TV and cooler demanded by them. She further pleaded that since she was beaten by the appellant and his mother and the dowry was demanded, therefore, she had made a complaint to the police under section 498A of the IPC which had ended into compromise in the presence of respectable members of the family. She had denied the allegation of insulting and mistreating her in-laws or abusing the appellant and throwing Belan on him. She had also denied the allegation of extending threat to commit suicide and had categorically stated that she wanted to live with the appellant and perform her duty as wife.

4. The trial Court by the impugned judgment dated 19.8.2003 has dismissed the application for divorce on reaching to the conclusion that the appellant had failed to establish the cruelty on the part of the respondent. The said finding has been arrived at by the trial Court after considering the evidence brought on record by the parties.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that from the evidence on record, the cruelty on the part of the respondent-wife is established, therefore, the appellant is entitled for the decree of divorce under section 13(1)(ia) of the Act. He further submitted that it is a case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, therefore, in terms of the various judgment of the Supreme Court, the appellant is entitled to the decree on this ground also. In support of his submissions he has relied upon several judgments of this Court as well as the Supreme Court.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent has supported the judgment of the trial Court by submitting that from the evidence on record, the ground of cruelty is not established. He has also submitted that it is not a case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage and no decree on this ground can be granted in the facts of the present case. In support of his submissions he has also relied upon several judgments of this Court as well as the Supreme Court.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for parties and perused the record.

8. The issues which arises for consideration in this appeal are as under:

(1) Whether the appellant has successfully established the ground of cruelty entitling him for decree of divorce under section 13(1)(ia) of the Act?

(2) Whether it is a case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage?

Both the issues are interconnected, therefore, they are decided together.

9. The appellant in order to prove the ground of cruelty had examined himself as FW1. He has stated that the respondent used to abuse and humiliate his parents whereas the statement of PW2 Kusum Deshmukh, mother of PW1, shows that respondent used to treat her father-in-law like her father. The incidents narrated by PW1 in