Short Note : 1. The respondent Kumersingh and the appellant Sarjubai were married in the year 1959 at Village Malikhedi, tahsil and district Shajapur, according to Hindu religious and customary rites. The respondent alleged that he was five years of age at the time of the marriage and that the appellant was elder to him in age. The respondent alleged that the appellant had come to his house only twice and stayed there for two or three days each time and that after the year 1970 she has not come to his house at all and that she has deserted him. According to the respondent the marriage was not consummated and the appellant is not performing her marital duties. The respondent, therefore, claimed a decree of divorce on the ground specified in clause (ib) of sub-section (1) of section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The appellant denied the respondent's allegations and alleged that she was always ready and willing to go to the respondent's house; but no body from respondent's side came to take her from her father's house where she has been staying. Held : The appellant had made reckless allegations to justify her living with her father and not coming to the respondent atleast for the last 3 years as admitted by her in her reply to the Notice (Ex. P-1). These allegations were without any basis and no evidence what-so-ever was laid at the trial to establish them. The trial Court, ill the circumstances, has rightly disbelieved the defence of the appellant that she was always ready and willing to go to the respondent's house and live with him and discharge her marital obligations. On the evidence adduced by the parties we are of the opinion that the learned trial Judge has rightly come to the conclusion that the appellant factually deserted the respondent in the year 1970 with the intention of deserting him and that the desertion was without any reasonable cause and without the consent of the respondent. The desertion continued for more than the full statutory period. 3. Shri Kutumbale also submitted that the Court has also not granted any alimony to the appellant. He has frankly admitted that no application for grant of alimony was made by the appellant in the lower Court. The desertion continued for more than the full statutory period. 3. Shri Kutumbale also submitted that the Court has also not granted any alimony to the appellant. He has frankly admitted that no application for grant of alimony was made by the appellant in the lower Court. Such an application can still be made to the lower Court under section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act which, if made, will be considered by that Court in accordance with law. Appeal dismissed.