1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None appears on behalf of respondent.

2. The present appeal has been filed under S.19(1) of the Family Court Act, 1984 impugning the judgment and decree dated 03.01.2023 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Vaishali at Hajipur in Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No. 64 of 2022, whereby the matrimonial suit, preferred by the appellant, for a decree of divorce, on dissolution of marriage, has been dismissed.

3. The case of the appellant as per petition filed before the Family Court is that the marriage of the appellant was solemnized with respondent No. 1 on 18.06.2018 as per the Hindu Rites and Custom and out of the wedlock one male child was born. After marriage and birth of male - child, the appellant went to the State of Madhya Pradesh for his livelihood. The appellant alleged that in the absence of appellant, his neighbour Sudhir Kumar (respondent No. 2) used to visit at his house regularly and had developed illicit physical relationship with his wife (respondent No. 1) which was protested by his mother. It is alleged that on 04.12.2020, Sudhir Kumar (respondent No. 2) came along with some anti - social elements and took his wife and minor children away with him and thereafter, she did not return to her matrimonial house. The respondents are living together in adultery. The appellant, therefore, prayed that the marriage between the appellant and respondent No. 1 be declared dissolved and a decree of divorce be passed in his favour.

4. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were issued notices but they choose not to appear to contest their case. Hence, the case was proceeded ex - parte.

5. During course of trial, altogether four witnesses have been produced on behalf of the appellant which are P.W.1 - Sudhir Rai (appellant himself), P.W. 2 - Subodh Rai (brother of the appellant), P.W. 3 - Suman Rai (brother - in - law of the appellant) and P.W.4 - Leelawati Devi (mother of the appellant).

6. After conclusion of the trial, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court has held that appellant has not proved desertion and adultery as against the respondent No. 1 in the absence of any independent and cogent material evidence and accordingly, the Trial Court came to the conclusion that the appellant was not entitled for decree of divorce on the ground of adultery and desertion and the suit was accordingly dismissed.

7. Thereafter, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and decree passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court in Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No. 64 of 2022, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant.

8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the judgment and decree passed by the learned Family Court is bad and appears to be mechanically passed without application of judicious mind. The witnesses who have appeared on behalf of the appellant have stated that marriage of the appellant with the respondent No. 1 was performed on 18.06.2018 and out of the wedlock, a male - child was also born. The behaviour of the respondent No. 1 towards her husband (appellant) and other in - laws family members was cordial for two years but thereafter, she established illicit relationship with Sudhir Kumar (respondent No. 2) and when her mother - in - law made objection, she left her matrimonial house with her minor children and went along with respondent No. 2. At present, she is staying with the respondent No. 2 in adultery along with her minor - child.

9. It appears from the case record and the judgment of the Court below that in spite of valid service of notice, neither respondent No. 1 nor respondent No. 2 appeared to respond on their behalf. Hence, the case was proceeded ex - parte.

10. This Court has also issued notice to the respondents on 29.01.2025. The office note dated 25.03.2025 suggests that respondent No. 1 refused to accept the notice. Thereafter, vide order dated 26.03.2025, Dasti Summon was issued to the responden