JUDGMENT : Manjari Nehru Kaul, J. The instant appeal has been preferred by the husband – Ashish to impugn the judgment and decree dated 25.05.2016 passed by Addl. District Judge, Jhajjar whereby his petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') was dismissed. 2. Few facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as pleaded in the petition filed by the appellant-husband before the learned Court below may be noticed. Marriage between the parties was solemnized on 24.02.2014 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. No child was born out of the said wedlock. The appellant-husband averred that the marriage was a simple affair wherein neither any dowry was demanded nor given. After the marriage, differences arose between the parties and their marriage ran into rough weather. The respondent-wife did not allow the appellant-husband to have any conjugal relations with her as the marriage had been solemnized against her wishes. She would often threaten to commit suicide and file false dowry cases against the appellant-husband. A petition under Section 12 of the Act for the annulment of the marriage was filed by the appellant-husband but on an apology tendered by the respondent-wife and her parents, he withdrew the said petition. The respondent-wife on 20.03.2014 went to her parental home on the pretext of pursuing further studies. When the appellant-husband went to bring her back to the matrimonial home on 30.03.2014, she refused and ever since then had been residing at her parental home. Earnest and repeated efforts were made thereafter by the appellant-husband as well as his father to bring her back to the matrimonial home but they failed to yield any fruit. It was pleaded by the appellant-husband that he came across some photographs of the respondent-wife with a boy and this was primarily the reason why she had been refusing to have any conjugal relations with him. It was further averred that she would often threaten the appellant-husband to get him ousted from his government job. As per the appellant-husband, the respondent-wife was a B.Tech and earning Rs.30,000/- per month, which was also one of the reasons for her parents to not let her return to the matrimonial home. He thus, prayed for dissolution of his marriage with respondent-wife as he had been treated with mental cruelty and deserted by her. 3. As per the appellant-husband, the respondent-wife was a B.Tech and earning Rs.30,000/- per month, which was also one of the reasons for her parents to not let her return to the matrimonial home. He thus, prayed for dissolution of his marriage with respondent-wife as he had been treated with mental cruelty and deserted by her. 3. Per contra, the respondent-wife in her written statement filed before the Court below, refuted and denied the allegations of the appellant-husband. She alleged that the husband and his mother would often demand dowry in the shape of car and cash from her. Many a times, she would be taunted and maltreated by the appellant-husband's mother as she was unable to fulfill her mother-in-law's demands. She claimed that it was the appellant-husband, who had left her at her parental home on 03.09.2014 on the pretext of paucity of space at her matrimonial home since some guests were to come to their house. She claimed that her mother-in-law wanted her son i.e. appellant-husband to remarry so that they could get better dowry from the second marriage. 4. From the pleadings, learned court below framed the following issues: 1. Whether the respondent has after the solemnization of marriage had voluntary sexual intercourse with any person other than her spouse? OPP 2. Whether the respondent has subjected the petitioner to cruelty after marriage? OPP 3. Whether the petition of petitioner is not maintainable in the present form? OPR 4. Relief. 5. The appellant-husband himself stepped into the witness box as PW-1 and examined three other witnesses. On the other hand, respondent-wife stepped into the witness box as RW-1 and examined her father Ajit Singh as RW-2. 6. On an analysis of the evidence led, the trial Court dismissed the petition filed by the appellant-husband by holding that the appellant-husband was unable to prove adultery and cruelty by way of any cogent and convincing evidence against the respondent-wife. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and reappraised the evidence as well as other material available on record. 8. During the pendency of the instant appeal, the parties were referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement, however, all efforts failed miserably. This court also interacted with the parties at length, but they maintained their respective stands as taken before the court below. 8. During the pendency of the instant appeal, the parties were referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement, however, all efforts failed miserably. This court also interacted with the parties at length, but they maintained their respective stands as taken before the court below. The appellant-husband reiterated his allegations against the respondent-wife, which she categorically denied and submitted that she was still willing to return to her matrimonial home. 9. Adverting to the case in hand, a perusal of the evidence and other material available on record reveals that the allegations of cruelty and adultery levelled against the respondent-wife are totally ill founded and frivolous. A great deal of reliance and stress was laid by the learned counsel for the appellant on some photographs i.e. Mark 'A', “B' and 'C', which as per the appellant-husband, had been procured by him from the facebook account of the respondent-wife. The respondent-wife admitted to the photographs and also identified one of the boys in the photographs as her former colleague/co-trainee. To our dismay, the appellant-husband has made appalling accusations against the respondent-wife of adultery only on the basis of a few photographs. The said photographs seemingly pertain to the time when the respondent-wife was working in a company at Gurgaon prior to their marriage. However, even presuming for the sake of arguments that the photographs were clicked after the marriage, a perusal of the photographs do not even obliquely reflect to any obscenity much less indicate any adulterous relationship between the respondent-wife and the boy(s). More over there has been no cogent much less convincing evidence led by the appellant-husband that the photographs of the respondent-wife were taken after the solemnization of the marriage of the parties. Hence, in view of the above, the allegations of the respondent-wife being in an adulterous relationship fails and rather reflects the insular mind set of the appellant-husband. Further, a perusal of the evidence of the appellant-husband reveals many contradictions, which raises eyebrows about the authenticity of the allegations levelled by the appellant-husband against the respondent-wife. His allegations are belied by his own testimony that the respondent-wife left the matrimonial home on 20.03.2014 i.e. just after 25 days of their marriage. He admitted in his cross-examination to have got his wife enrolled at a coaching centre and also deposited her fees on 15.04.2014 and 18.04.2014 respectively. His allegations are belied by his own testimony that the respondent-wife left the matrimonial home on 20.03.2014 i.e. just after 25 days of their marriage. He admitted in his cross-examination to have got his wife enrolled at a coaching centre and also deposited her fees on 15.04.2014 and 18.04.2014 respectively. Further, it has also come in the evidence of the appellant-husband that he along with his wife had visited his sister's house on the occasion of Raksha Bandhan at Faridabad on 09.08.2014 and stayed there for the night. Not only this, the appellant-husband in his cross-examination stated that he had messaged his wife on 23.09.2014 to inform her that he had given her metro card to his father to travel to Kashmiri Gate, New Delhi to purchase some medicines. Further, the testimony of the appellant-husband does not inspire confidence at all inasmuch as on one hand he has alleged that the wife refused to have any conjugal relations with him but in the same breath he admitted in his cross-examination that after their marriage when they went to Manali everything was normal between the spouses and they did not quarrel. The length and breadth of the evidence led by the appellant-husband reveals material contradictions which definitely create a serious doubt about the authenticity of his allegations levelled against the respondent-wife. The totality of the circumstances make it evident that the appellant-husband is desperately trying to look for excuses to get rid of the respondent-wife from his life. 10. As a sequel to the above discussion, we do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned judgment dated 25.05.2016 passed by the court below, which is well reasoned one. Consequently, the present appeal being devoid of any merit stands dismissed.