ORDER Viney Mittal, J. - The present appeal has been filed by Smt. Saroj appellant challenging the judgment dated March 14, 2002 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Bhiwani whereby the marriage between the parties namely, the present appellant-Saroj and respondent Vinod Kumar Tanwar was ordered to be dissolved by a decree of divorce. 2. A petition under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act had been filed by respondent Vinod Kumar Tanwar for dissolution of their marriage. It was stated in the petition that the parties were married on December 10, 1974. The husband was a resident of Panchkula and was working as a Sales Officer in a private company, the wife was a Hindi Lecturer in a Senior Secondary School at Kharak since the year 1993. It was further stated by the husband that his brother who had been working as Revenue Clerk had died while leaving behind a widow and two minor children. After the death of his brother, the husband was also looking after them as a moral obligation. It was further stated that the wife is a lady of ego and had been pressurising the husband not to look after the family of his deceased brother or his own mother. However, when he refused to comply with her wishes then she filed a divorce petition in the court at Rohtak in the year 1994 levelling false and frivolous allegations against him with regard to cruelty. In the aforesaid petition, she also levelled the allegations regarding the demand of dowry etc. The said petition was dismissed in default. 3. The wife was served with the notice of the petition. She appeared and contested the same. A written statement was filed by her. In the written statement the wife not only denied the averments made by the husband in the petition, but also alleged that the husband was having illicit relations with his Bhabhi, who was a widow of his brother. It was further claimed by the wife that the husband used to give beatings to her at the instance of his bhabhi and when she resisted their illicit relationship, then the Bhabhi of the husband asked the husband to treat her with cruelty. It was further claimed by the wife that the husband used to give beatings to her at the instance of his bhabhi and when she resisted their illicit relationship, then the Bhabhi of the husband asked the husband to treat her with cruelty. It was further claimed in the written statement that the wife had made her best efforts to reside with her husband and to serve her old mother-in-law but she was never allowed to do so. It was stated that she had joined the service since her husband was unemployed and subsequently the husband became ungrateful and started maltreating her. Various other objections were also taken. 4. The learned trial Court framed the issues and the parties led their respective evidence. 5. After the conclusion of the evidence the learned trial court on the basis of the record held that the wife had made wild, reckless and scandalous allegations against the husband and it was not supported by any evidence and further that the parties are leaving separately since 1993 and both of them had not made efforts for any reconciliation. On the basis of the findings with regard to the cruelty and desertion, a decree of divorce was passed by the learned Additional District Judge. 6. The wife has now felt aggrieved and filed the present appeal. 7. I have heard Shri Gorakh Nath, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and with his assistance have gone through the record of the case. 8. It is not in dispute that the appellant wife while filing the written statement had levelled very serious allegations against the respondent-husband to the effect that he was having illicit relations with his own Bhabhi i.e. widow of his deceased brother. No only the aforesaid allegations have been levelled in the written statement but there is absolutely no evidence led by the appellant-wife in support thereof. Such serious allegations without any basis and proof would actually amount to a cruelty in itself. The allegations of the kind noticed above and the allegations that the husband was living in an adultery with his own Bhabhi are very serious allegations. A bald statement made by the appellant wife to support the above allegations cannot be treated to be a sufficient proof. The allegations of the kind noticed above and the allegations that the husband was living in an adultery with his own Bhabhi are very serious allegations. A bald statement made by the appellant wife to support the above allegations cannot be treated to be a sufficient proof. It has been held in the case of Tapan Kumar Chakarborty v. Smt. Jyotsna Chakraborty, 1997(2) Hindu Law Reporter 19 that levelling of reckless and baseless allegations like adultery amount to cruelty qua the spouse against whom such allegations are levelled. In a similar situation even this court had taken an identical view in the case of Manjit Kaur v. Avtar Singh, 2001(2) Marriage & Divorce Judicial Reports 351. A similar view was taken by the Bombay High Court in the case Rajan Vasant Revankar v. Mrs. Shubha Rajan Revankar, A.I.R. 1995 Bombay 246. 9. Besides this the learned trial court had made the following observations in para 30 of the impugned judgment. From any above discussion, one can very easily come to a conclusion that both the parties are residing separately. Husband-petitioner is serving in the North at Panchkula whereas wife-respondent is serving in the South at Bhiwani. Both the parties are not making any efforts for reconciliation of their disputes. They even did not make any necessary efforts when their matter was put before Lok Adalat for reconciliation rather on one occasion, the parties did not come present before the Presiding Officer of permanent Lok Adalat. The marriage property has been returned by the parties which was belonging to both the husband and wife. Thus, it appears that their union as such is a dead house of marriage. Both the parties are standing at two different and opposite poles. No one is making any efforts to come closure to each other. Thus, it is clear that the marriage is almost broken between the parties. It is not possible for the parties to live together as husband and wife in such atmosphere. Consequently, I decide issue No. 1 and 2 in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent. 10. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find that any interference is required in the judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge. Thus, finding no merit in the present appeal, the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. Appeal dismissed.