JUDGMENT G R Moolchandani, J. - The respondent has been served by publication. None appears. 2. Impugned judgment dated 26.08.2016 shows that even before the trial Court the respondent was proceeded against exparte. 3. We have heard the appellant who appears in person. 4. Marriage between the parties as per hindu custom was solemnized on 27.11.2005. A daughter was born to the couple on 11.09.2006. Case pleaded by the appellant in the petition seeking divorce was that after the marriage the parents of the respondent started harassing her by demanding dowry in sum of Rs. 5 lacs and a car. They used to threaten her that if the dowry demand was not met their son would solemnize a second marriage. She further alleged that she was not fed properly. She further pleaded that on account of not fulfilling the dowry demand she was forced to leave the matrimonial house on 08.03.2008. She lodged a complaint pursuant whereto FIR for offences punishable under Section 498- A/406 IPC was registered and charge-sheet presented in the Court of competent jurisdiction. That on account of the fact that her husband was not giving any money to her for maintenance of herself and her daughter she had to file a petition under the Domestic Violence Act in which Rs. 5,000/- per month was awarded to her. She pleaded that this amount was not being paid. 5. As noted above, the respondent did not choose to contest the divorce petition in spite of being served and he was proceeded against ex-parte. Appearing as her witness the appellant deposed facts on oath in sync with her pleadings in the divorce petition. 6. Dismissing the petition the learned Judge, Family Court has held that the allegations in the petition are general without any dates of the mental harassment being specified. The dates on which the dowry was demanded have not been specified. With respect to the specific plea that on 08.03.2008 she was thrown out of the matrimonial house and in respect of which the appellant deposed on oath to said fact the learned Judge, Family Court has held that the appellant has not been able to furnish any proof in support thereof. 7. Suffice it to state that statements made on oath by the appellant have gone unchallenged because the respondent did not appear before the Family Court. 7. Suffice it to state that statements made on oath by the appellant have gone unchallenged because the respondent did not appear before the Family Court. Specific plea with statement on oath that on 08.03.2008 the appellant was thrown out of the matrimonial house has not been controverted by the respondent. The statement on oath that the respondent is giving not a penny to the appellant to maintain the appellant and the daughter born has not been controverted by the respondent. 8. In our opinion case is made out to grant appellant the relief she prayed for. 9. The appeal is allowed. Impugned judgment dated 26.08.2016 is set aside. Petition filed by the appellant seeking divorce on ground of cruelty is allowed. Marriage between the parties solemnized on 27.11.2005 is annulled by granting the appellant a decree of divorce. 10. No costs.