JUDGMENT P. K. TRIPATHY, J. — The respondent-wife filed a petition before the Family Court, Rourkela under Sec. 13 (1)(i)(a) and Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce and for return of the properties mentioned in the petition, alternatively for payment of a sum of Rs. 40,000/- as the equivalent value of the properties and for a consolidated sum of Rs. 50,000/- as permanent maintenance. The said petition was registered as Civil Proceeding No. 112 of 1996. By judgment and decree dated May 14, 1997 the Family Court, Rourkela dissolved the marriage by granting a decree of divorce, directed to return the properties available with the husband or to pay a sum of Rs. 8,000/- as the value of the goods found to be with the husband and granted permanent alimony @ Rs. 400/- per month. Being aggrieved the husband has failed the present appeal. 2. The case of the wife (respondent herein), inter alia is : She was married to the present appellant on March 2, 1995 at Kundren according to the customary rites prevailing in their society. The articles mentioned in paragraph 3 of the petition were gifted by her parents for use of both the spouses and the husband is in possession of those properties. The marriage was duly consummated and a male child was born on May 8, 1996. Since a week after the marriage the husband started abusing and as¬saulting her and pressurising her to bring costly articles like TV, fan, Godrej Almirah etc. from her parents. As the wife ex¬pressed inability of her parents, the husband became angry and tried to throttle her two to three times. After about one month of the marriage the husband went away to Hyderabad, his working place.During absence of the husband his father outraged her modesty and raped her. The husband’s father threatened to kill her, if she disclosed the incident to others. The wife thereafter wrote to the husband about such misbehaviour of the father-in-law and requested him to come back home to rescue her. The husband came back after about a month but he was gained over by his father. Both the father and the son joined together to assault her and threatened her to keep silence. The wife thereafter wrote to the husband about such misbehaviour of the father-in-law and requested him to come back home to rescue her. The husband came back after about a month but he was gained over by his father. Both the father and the son joined together to assault her and threatened her to keep silence. The wife continued to live in the matrimonial house with the hope that the husband and his relations would mend their attitude and behaviour towards her. However, as the things did not improve, she sent information to her parents and she was taken home in the month of August, 1995. By the time she left for her parents house she was already pregnant. The husband, however, did not go back to his place of work and stayed back in his native village. However, he did not take any initiative or step to bring her back. He was occasional¬ly coming to the wife at her parental house, but during those times he used to destroy the medicines purchased for her treat¬ment in order to harm the wife and the baby in the womb. Ulti¬mately a male child was born. In spite of ill-treatment by the husband and in-laws the wife came to her in-law’s house with the child for celebration of ‘Sasthi’ and ‘Ekoisa’. She was very weak after delivery and needed proper food and nourishment. The hus¬band and his relation denied to provide required medicine and food. The wife was working as an Anganbadi worker. On July 30, 1996 she was to attend Anganbadi meeting. She sought permission from the husband to attend the said meeting. The husband did not give permission and on the contrary shut the door and assaulted her. He snatched away the relevant registers and papers of her office and drove her out of the house. The wife had to take shelter in the cow-shed in the night. Next day i.e. July 30, 1996 when she was proceeding to attend Anganbadi meeting the husband chased and assaulted her on the road. He even snatched away the child from her arms. At that time the parents of the husband reached the spot and they also assaulted her on the road. She lodged a complaint with the Hemagiri Police Station. The child was recovered and given back to the wife. He even snatched away the child from her arms. At that time the parents of the husband reached the spot and they also assaulted her on the road. She lodged a complaint with the Hemagiri Police Station. The child was recovered and given back to the wife. As the husband assured the Police that he would not ill-treat her, she again came to matrimonial home and could stay only for 7 days. Once the husband and wife went to hemagiri. it was already dark when they were returning home. The wife suggested to spend the night in her parent’s house. The husband did not agree and instead stayed in the house of a neighbour with whom her parents had ill-feelings. The next day the eldest brother of the wife asked the husband about the reason for not staying in their house. The husband got annoyed and pushed her brother violently. Being a handicapped person her brother fell down on the road and sustained pain on his left hand. The husband thereafter went to the police station and lodged a false complaint. The husband and the relations are very dangerous men and she has come to learn that they had killed one boy in their house and threw away his dead body. There being no chance of re-union, the wife has filed the petition for di¬vorce and other reliefs. 3. The husband contested the proceeding by filing a writ¬ten statement denying to the allegations made in the petition. The husband alleged that it is the wife who went away to her parents deserting him. The husband has claimed that he and his family members made whole hearted attempt to bring back the respondent, but she declined. The husband has also alleged that he was assaulted by the brother of the wife when he went to bring her back. 4. The respondent-wife examined five witnesses including herself to prove her allegations. The appellant-husband examined 3 witnesses including himself in defence. Upon consideration of the evidence on record the Family Court held that the Respondent-wife has proved cruelty, that properties worth Rs. 8,000/- gifted by the wife’s parents are with the husband and that the wife is entitled to permanent alimony @ Rs. 400/- per month for maintain¬ing herself and her child. 5. The allegation of the respondent-wife is that the husband and his father were often assaulting her. 8,000/- gifted by the wife’s parents are with the husband and that the wife is entitled to permanent alimony @ Rs. 400/- per month for maintain¬ing herself and her child. 5. The allegation of the respondent-wife is that the husband and his father were often assaulting her. In her evidence the wife has clearly stated that she was being often assaulted by the husband and his father. She has mentioned a specific instance when her husband dragged her on the public road and snatched away the child from her. Other four witnesses examined on behalf of the wife corroborated to the said allegation. The husband has not examined any witness besides himself to refute the said allega¬tion. It is admitted that in the month of August, 1996, the husband and wife both went to Anganbadi Centre and on their way back had spent night in the village of wife’s parental house but the husband did not go to his father-in-law’s house with the wife and stayed in the house of a person with whom the wife’s father had inimical relationship. The said behaviour on the part of the husband appears to be unusual and shows his disregard for the sentiment or emotion of the wife and her relations. No explana¬tion has been given by the husband why he chose to spend the night in the house of a person with whom his father-in-law had bad relationship. No relation of the husband has come forward to deny the allegation of assault as made by the wife. No witness on behalf of the husband has uttered anything against the wife. Two other witnesses examined on behalf of the husband have only stated about the monthly income of the husband. 5. It has been claimed by the wife that she stayed in her matrimonial house for about a year and a male child was born out of the wed-lock. The husband in his evidence has alleged that the wife left for her father’s place just 15 days after the marriage and thereafter, she did not return. The said allegation of the husband has not been corroborated by anybody. The husband in his evidence has alleged that the wife left for her father’s place just 15 days after the marriage and thereafter, she did not return. The said allegation of the husband has not been corroborated by anybody. The husband himself in the written statement (paragraph 12) has referred to a bond executed by both the wife and the husband, xerox copy of the bond/undertaking enclosed to the written statement indicates that the husband was manhandling the wife and even objection to wife’s frequent visit to her parent’s place without his permission. The said bond/undertaking does not show that the wife was continuously staying in her parent’s house from April, 1995 as alleged. Usual¬ly no wife would like to leave the matrimonial house without any cause. Only allegation against the wife that she is quarrelsome. In that respect evidence from the side of the husband is not substantial. There is nothing on record to show that there was any attempt on the part of the husband to bring back the wife after she had to leave for her parents' house. Considering the materials on record, we cannot hold that the findings arrived at by the Family Court regarding cruelty are improbable or absurd. 6. The wife’s allegation of sexual misbehaviour against the father-in-law does not get any support from the materials on record and cannot be held to be proved. The allegation is so serious that if it is true, wife cannot be asked to remain in the matrimonial house and if it is not true a daughter-in-law making such allegation cannot be trusted any further. Thus, rift between the parties is total and complete. 7. The husband has alleged that he was assaulted by the brother of the wife. It appears from the materials on record that the brother of the wife is a physically handicapped person and it is difficult to believe that such handicapped person would as¬sault the husband. Of course, the husband lodged a complaint with the Police, but nothing further has been produced to show the result of investigation, if any. It is very much clear from the materials on record that the relationship between the spouses has become so strained that it is no longer possible for them to live together. 7. Of course, the husband lodged a complaint with the Police, but nothing further has been produced to show the result of investigation, if any. It is very much clear from the materials on record that the relationship between the spouses has become so strained that it is no longer possible for them to live together. 7. Regarding the Family Court’s finding about the goods given at the time of marriage and value thereof, we do not find any infirmity in the said finding to warrant any interference. The value of the goods as determined by the Family Court appears to be modest and reasonable. The Family Court has awarded perma¬nent alimony @ Rs. 400/- per month. The Family Court has recorded a finding regarding the husband’s income. In the facts and cir¬cumstances of this case, the Family Court has rightly awarded a monthly maintenance of Rs. 400/- inasmuch as it is not possible for the wife to maintain herself and her child from the meagre salary she gets as an Anganbadi worker. 8. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any material error in the findings recorded by the Family Court to interfere with the impugned judgment. The appeal its thus dismissed with cost. Lawyers fee is assessed at contested scale. P. RAY, J. I agree. Appeal dismissed.