JUDGMENT : Sharad Kumar Sharma, J. 1. It is a wife’s appeal filed belatedly challenging the judgment dated 15th January, 2016, passed by Additional Judge, Family Court Rishekesh, Dehradun, whereby, Suit No. 34 of 2015, Virendra Singh Rana Vs. Usha Rana, filed under Section 13 (1) (i-b), seeking dissolution of marriage solemnized on 19th March, 2014, has been decreed. In the relief, she has prayed for that the appeal may be allowed and the suit, as preferred by the husband for dissolution of marriage, may be dismissed. 2. The husband in his petition before the Family Court had submitted that though they had been married on 9th May, 2004, at Khedari, Kharakma, Tehsil Rishikesh, Dehradun, post marriage, the husband realized that the attitude of the wife towards the parents and other family members was not in accordance with the principles which normally a Hindu has to follow during her stay with her in-laws. The ground as agitated by the husband was that the respondent wife is a lady of very short temper and often gets irritated on every trifle issue which normally chances in each family, particularly, in any matrimonial relation and faced with the situation instead of exercising patience and accommodating, she gets aggravated and misbehaves and even to the extent of using abusive languages to the family members and husband. 3. The husband submitted that out of their cohabitation, a daughter Mahak was borne on 1st April, 2006 and 2nd child Master Lucky was borne on 2nd October, 2008. He submitted that both the children are being taken care of by the plaintiff himself because the defendant wife had never shown any concern, love and affection to them, because she had her own aptitude and mode towards her life of living freely. The husband submitted that when despite of all efforts to make her understand failed and gradually the environment in the family was deteriorated and it was practically becoming impossible to live together, the necessity arose to institute the proceedings on 21st August, 2015, because as a matter of fact the wife has gone so low that she has even lodged frivolous complaints against husband and family members and is not carrying any love and affection towards the children or the family members and has even lodged an F.I.R. before the Police Chauki Shyampur on 10th November, 2010. 4. 4. The husband submitted that the wife on 30th October, 2015, came to the in-laws house and she misbehaved with his mother and after that she has taken all her valuables and left the matrimonial home alongwith her brother, thus, she has left the society of husband for no valid reasons. 5. In reply, wife filed her written statement and in the written statement she contended that the allegations in the plaint are partly admitted only to the extent of marriage having been solemnized between them on 19.03.2014 and the fact of birth of the children. Rest of the allegations which pertains to atrocities said to have been exercised by the wife was denied. She further submitted that there chanced an untoward incident on 14th August, 2012, when the plaintiff, after physically assaulting the defendant wife had thrown her out of the house and she had to take shelter in her parents’ home and is dependent upon them. She admitted the fact that on 21st February, 2015, she did lodge a complaint at Police Station, By-pass road and for the purposes of protection, she contends that she has taken the police personnel but still she submits that the incident of 21st February, 2015, has chanced when she was manhandled by the in-laws. 6. Another ground which she has pleaded in the written statement to support her contention that there was a cruelty being exercised by her in-laws, when she contended that despite of the fact that her family members had given sufficient amount of dowry, but still they continued to demand dowry. She submits that the parents of the husband are greedy persons and their lust for dowry never ends. She rather wanted to plead that she was dealt with cruelty by in-laws, by consistent dowry demand. 7. On perusal of the records, it reveals that the defendant wife has lodged a police complaint on 10th October, 2010, in which, a settlement was arrived at before the Police and, on the basis of the settlement, wife accompanied her husband. She submits that even after the settlement when she joined back the matrimonial home, once again the old manhandling of her continued and she was beaten by the husband, who started quarreling and abusing her. 8. She submits that even after the settlement when she joined back the matrimonial home, once again the old manhandling of her continued and she was beaten by the husband, who started quarreling and abusing her. 8. The husband developed a case by stating that during the course of quarrel, an instance arose when the wife uttered few words which will amount to be admission that she is in relation with another boy and wants to spend her life with him and threatened that if the husband lodges a complaint before the family members or before any authority, she will commit suicide. 9. What is remarkable in the written statement which the wife has filed is paper No. 14-Ka, in that, the marriage has been admitted, but she contended that the manner in which she was kept by the mother-in-law and husband by creating atrocious scene and making an environment so that she may somehow leave the matrimonial home. She submitted that the plaintiff and his family members are greedy persons and on an earlier occasion also they had created similar circumstance with their elder daughter-in-law, due to which, for the last 15 years, she is residing with her parents. The parent-in-law are in the habit of raising illicit demand of dowry from their daughter-in-law due to which they have spoiled the matrimonial life of their elder son as well as the appellant. She submitted that she wants to live in matrimonial home alongwith her children, but she wants to live alone and wants to spend her life peacefully with her family members. 10. Based on the pleadings, the issue which has been framed by the Court was to the following effects : 1. Whether the defendant wife has deserted the husband and her children w.e.f. 13th October, 2010. 2. Whether the desertion by the defendant wife of the plaintiff and children is without any reason and by their freewill and any other relief. 3. Any other relief. 11. The plaintiff husband, in support of his evidence, presented himself in witness box as PW1 and presented his mother Bachni Devi as PW2. The defendant, apart from producing the medical certificates and police report has also appeared in the witness box as DW1 and submitted her affidavit in examination-in-chief. 12. The learned Trial Court, consolidated the issue Nos. 11. The plaintiff husband, in support of his evidence, presented himself in witness box as PW1 and presented his mother Bachni Devi as PW2. The defendant, apart from producing the medical certificates and police report has also appeared in the witness box as DW1 and submitted her affidavit in examination-in-chief. 12. The learned Trial Court, consolidated the issue Nos. 1 and 2, as they were based upon an appreciation of common fact and evidence, as it related to the desertion, the period of desertion and whether the desertion was voluntary or not. 13. The Court held that according to the wife, in her written statement she has submitted that she was thrown out of the house by the in-laws after being physically beaten and because of that reason, since 14th August, 2012, she claimed to be residing with her parents and is dependent on them for her revival. 14. The Court observed that wife is residing with her in-laws since 13th October, 2010, whereas, according to the wife, she is residing with her parents from 14th August, 2012. The Court held that let us accept the stand taken by the wife that she is residing with her parents since 14th August, 2012 and the suit in itself was filed on 26th February,2015, it means that there had been a desertion for more than two years and it will amount to voluntarily withdrawing herself from the company of the husband and the marriage deserved to be dissolved. 15. The Court held that desertion which is an admitted fact has chanced at the behest of the wife which is admitted by her and the witness produced by the wife Sulochana Rawat DW2, wherein, she has stated that the wife was residing separately for a period of more than three years which will amount that the wife has voluntarily chosen not to discharge her matrimonial obligations and has withdrawn from the society of the husband. 16. The second issue which was under consideration is as to whether the factum of desertion was a voluntary act or not, and as to whether there was an intention on the part of the wife to permanently desert the husband, i.e. whether there was animus decidendi. 16. The second issue which was under consideration is as to whether the factum of desertion was a voluntary act or not, and as to whether there was an intention on the part of the wife to permanently desert the husband, i.e. whether there was animus decidendi. The wife, during the course of adducing her evidence, has appeared as DW1 and on perusal of the cross examination of DW1, i.e. wife and DW2, i.e. Smt. Sulochana, if we read the excerpts of the statement of DW1 as held on 6th January, 22016, she admits following facts. 1. Daughter studies in Class 6. 2. She does not know in which class the son studies. 3. She has not met the children since the time of institution of the suit. 4. She has not gone to the school to meet the children 5. She submitted that she does not want to live with the husband. 6. She submitted that she wants Rs.10 lacs and would get the marriage dissolved. 17. Just to show her bona fides as to why she has not met the children and did not know the whereabouts of them, she submitted that the family members of the husband used to pour poison into the ears of the children so as to develop hatred against the wife. 18. The leaned Trial Court, while considering the statement recorded of DW2, i.e. mother of defendant wife, which was recorded on 6th January, 2016, and is available on record as paper No. 26-ka, she has stated that she has got no relationship with the children and she submitted that it is not possible for my daughter, i.e. the appellant, herein, to live with the husband. 19. 19. The Court, on scrutinizing the statement, concluded that looking to the statements recorded by the wife as DW1 well as mother as DW2, there was no hope for them to continue with the relationship of husband and wife and thus the Court while considering the evidence, held that according to the statement of wife herself since she has stated that she does not want to live together with the husband and when she has stated that she wants Rs.10 lacs to dissolve the marriage, all this goes to show that there is a complete break down of marriage, where there is no possibility of retrieving the same, hence, the decree of divorce as granted by the Court below, cannot be faulted of because elements contained under Section 13 are fulfilled and desertion and cruelty are proved. 20. Hence, the appeal fails. The judgment and decree dated 15th January, 2015, as passed by the Court below is upheld. The Registry is directed to prepare the necessary decree. No order as to costs.