JUDGMENT D.M. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. The decree of divorce granted in favour of the applicant-wife by the Trial Court in proceedings under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 on 9th April, ly92 has come before this Court for confirmation under Section 17 of the said Act. 2. The wife claimed divorce on the alleged ground that the non-applicant-husband is leading an adulterous life with another wife by name Vijaya. The non-applicant-husband opposed the petition filed by the wife by filing reply in the Trial Court; but absented on the date of evidence and did not enter the witness box. The wife who examined herself in the Trial Court, stated that after her marriage with the non-applicant, she discovered that he had already kept another woman in the house and had a child from that woman. Her testimony is supported by P.W. 2 Smt. Anna Kutti Thomas. The learned Judge of the Trial Court believed the testimony of the wife and the witness supporting her to hold that the alleged ground of husband being guilty of adultery under Section 10 of the Act was fully made out against him and granted the desired relief to the wife of a decree of divorce. In this reference, both the parties were noticed; but only wife, assisted by her Counsel, appeared. The husband failed to appear. 3. We have carefully gone through the judgment of the Trial Court and the oral evidence led by the wife. The evidence led by her was not rebutted by the husband. The allegation against the husband is that he had kept a woman by name Vijaya and had an issue from her. The husband alone could have denied the fact; but preferred not to enter the witness-box. The irresistible inference, therefore, is that what the wife alleges is true. 4. We find that the Trial Court has rightly believed the wife and granted a decree in favour of the wife of dissolution of marriage under Section 10 of the Act. 5. The decree granted by the Trial Court on 9-4-92 is hereby confirmed. Since the husband has not appeared, we make no order as to costs.