JUDGMENT : Antony Dominic, J. 1. The appellant was the petitioner before the Family Court, Kalpetta, where she filed OP No. 124/2011 seeking divorce from the respondent invoking cruelty provided u/s 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. That OP was dismissed by the Family Court. It is challenging the order of the Family Court, the appeal is filed. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also considered the pleadings. 2. Reading of the order shows that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnised on 05/05/1997 and a child was born in the wed-lock. The appellant is a post-graduate and the respondent is only a matriculate. Reading of the order gives us the impression that the disparity in the educational qualifications mainly led to strain in the matrimonial relationship. 3. Be that as if may, it was pleaded that the respondent had beaten her with materials. However, the appellant did not specify what type of material or other weapons allegedly used by the respondent. It was also alleged that the respondent had inflicted injuries on her and that she was hospitalised for treatment. However, the details of the hospital or the details of the injuries suffered etc. were not even produced by the appellant. Therefore, the allegation of physical cruelty was not proved. 4. It was also alleged that the respondent is an alcoholic and he was admitted in Shanti De-Addiction Centre, Kozhikode for treatment. In order to substantiate that pleading, the appellant has produced Ext. A2 before the Family Court. However, as rightly found by the Family Court, there was substantial difference in the name and address of the patient and that of the address as given in the cause title to the petition filed by the appellant herself. It was for that reason, the Family Court declined to place reliance on that document. 5. Another contention raised was that after consuming alcohol, the respondent had attempted to commit suicide. This fact also was not proved. From the above, it is obvious that the allegations of cruelty raised by the appellant were not proved and therefore the findings of the Family Court do not suffer from any illegality. If that be so, the Family Court cannot be faulted for not accepting the case of the appellant. Therefore, the Mat. Appeal will stand dismissed.