two families. It is also not in dispute that appellant had sought some time to convince his family members about the factum of marriage and to get acceptance for the respondent wife in her matrimonial home. Allegation is that wife was deserted though she tried her level best to adjust but parents of the appellant did not accept her and in the second instance when respondent wife was taken to her matrimonial home appellant started misbehaving with her and started consuming alcohol.

4. It is alleged that there were frequent instances of abuse and maarpeet. Allegation is that appellant used to try to perform unnatural sex with the wife and, therefore, allegations were made against each other. It is submitted that the decree of divorce has been granted on the ground of cruelty whereas two grounds were taken,. viz., that of desertion and cruelty but the trial Court has not accepted the ground of desertion and has granted decree only on the ground of cruelty. It is also submitted by Shri Somesh Shukla, Advocate for the appellant that this ground of cruelty is not made out from the evidence available on record and, therefore, decree of divorce be set aside. It is also submitted that learned trial Court has interestingly taken one of the circumstances of not getting executed the decree under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act which was granted in favour of the present appellant XXX by the trial Court, of his intention reflecting cruelty and irretrievable breakdown of marriage. It is submitted that non-execution of a decree of restitution of conjugal rights as was obtained by the husband cannot be construed as a circumstance pointing out towards cruelty and, therefore, trial Court erred in granting a decree of divorce on such insignificant instance.

5. Shri Aneesh Trivedi, learned counsel for the wife submits that after marriage victim wife was subjected to rape. A criminal case was registered. She sought help from her husband, i.e., the appellant but no help was extended. She was literally dumped probably because she belongs to different community.

6. It is submitted that respondent wife was forced to live with her parents at her parental house and during that period no attention was paid by the appellant husband. Thus, it is submitted that appellant husband by not taking care of the interest of the wife and leaving her in the parental house is an instance of cruelty apart from she being subjected to constant abuses and maarpit.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the scanned Lower Court record available on E.R.P. respondent wife examined herself as P.W.-1. She stated that her marriage was performed on 21.6.2017 at Arya Samaj Mandir, Bhagirathpura, Indore. Since the parents of the appellant were not agreeable to marriage, they stayed at a rented house for about a week on the ground that the parents of the appellant were not aggregable to the marriage but later on also he could not convince his parents as a result of which she was forced to live in her parental house. After her one week stay at her parental house appellant had taken her but she was again kept in a rented house where appellant used to come drunk, abused and beat her. He used to repent that after marrying the respondent wife he had lost touch with his family. These instances of abusing and beating continued on day to day basis when respondent Wife XXX had called her brother who came and took her to her parental house. There was no change in the attitude of the appellant and in the meanwhile victim was subjected to rape. She faced unnecessary allegations in the hands of the appellant causing physical and mental deterioration and mental depression. It has also come on record in the evidence that dowry items like T.V., Fridge, Cooler, Almirah, Bullet Motorcycle and jewelry items were demanded by the appellant. It has also come on record that appellant had illicit relationship with another woman for which photographs were pro