JUDGMENT : M.G.S. KAMAL, J. 1. This appeal is filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act by the appellant-wife against the Judgment and Order dated 12.03.2019 passed in M.C. No. 87/2019 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Vijayapura, dissolving the marriage dated 09.12.2009. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondenthusband filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia)(iii)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, contending inter-alia that his marriage with the appellant-wife was solemnized on 09.12.2009 as per Hindu rights and customs and was also registered with the Sub-Registrar, Dharwad on 07.04.2010. That after the marriage, respondent and appellant resided together as husband and wife at Dharwad. It is alleged that the appellant was suspecting the respondent of having illicit relationship with another woman. That the appellant had conceded with the respondent that she was subjected to cruelty and humiliation at her parental house by her father and elder brother because she was a left-hander. That she was suffering from Asthama. That she gave birth to a daughter on 04.09.2013 who was named Mahi. That the appellant was suffering from illusionary problem. That during February 2016, she had told that she was suffering from breast cancer and on examination, it turned out to be an illusion, then her family members had also told that she was suffering from said illusionary problem. That she was being treated for the said issue with one Dr. Vinod Kulkarni at Hubli. Thereafter, she had some gynaeocological problems, for which she was treated by a doctor at Tavargere who had diagnosed her of Prolactin supposed to have been caused due to the side-effects of the tablets prescribed by Dr. Vinod Kulkarni. That the appellant left the matrimonial home on the pretext of visiting her parents. That on 02.11.2016, the brother of the appellant, with the help of three to four person, forcibly took the respondent herein to Vijayapura and assaulted him severely. That the father of the respondent herein had filed a missing complaint before the Sub-urban Police Station, Dharwad. That the parents of the appellant had taken forcible statements from the respondent herein threatening him of his life with dire consequences. Thereafter, the respondent came to Dharwad and took treatment and lodged a private complaint before the JMFC Court, Dhawad in PCR No. 376/2016. That it was then confirmed to the respondent herein that the appellant was indeed suffering from Schizophrania. Thereafter, the respondent came to Dharwad and took treatment and lodged a private complaint before the JMFC Court, Dhawad in PCR No. 376/2016. That it was then confirmed to the respondent herein that the appellant was indeed suffering from Schizophrania. Thus, the respondent was subjected to cruelty by the appellant and her family members and therefore, constrained to file a petition seeking dissolution of marriage. 3. Upon service of notice, the appellant-wife appeared before the Family Court. Matter was referred to mediation, but failed. The appellant had neither filed objections nor contested the matter. 4. Based on the pleadings, the Family Court framed the following points for its consideration: (i) Whether the petitioner proves that respondent treated him with mental cruelty as alleged in the petition? (ii) Whether the petitioner proves that the respondent is suffering from Schizophrania, i.e. incurable unsound mind? (iii) Whether the petitioner is entitled for the relief as sought in the petition? (iv) What order or decree? 5. The respondent examined himself as PW-1 and got exhibited 13 documents marked as Ex.P1 to P13. Appellant neither cross-examined the respondent nor lead any evidence. The Family Court, after considering the evidence made available, answered the Point No(i) in affirmative and Point No. (ii) in negative and held Point No. (iii) in affirmative. Consequently, passed the Judgment and Order dated 12.03.2019 dissolving the marriage dated 09.12.2009 under Section 3(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and dismissed the petition under Section 13(1)(iii)(a) of the Act. 6. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgment and Order dated 12.03.2019, the appellant-wife has filed the present appeal. 7. At this juncture, it is necessary to note that the learned counsel for appellant and respondent had submitted that the appellant and respondent had amicably resolved the matter and were living together and that they would file necessary documents to complete the formality of settlement. On this pretext, the matter was adjourned from time to time. This Court had also directed the parties to be present personally before the Court to report settlement. However, the parties have not appeared, yet this Court taking lenient view, adjourned the matter as and when requested. On this pretext, the matter was adjourned from time to time. This Court had also directed the parties to be present personally before the Court to report settlement. However, the parties have not appeared, yet this Court taking lenient view, adjourned the matter as and when requested. On 15.04.2021, learned counsel for the parties submitted that according to the information available with them, the appellant and the respondent have amicably resolved their differences and have resumed marital life, but the learned counsel are handicapped as the parties are not responding to their calls. In the light of the said submission, this Court issued notice to appellant and respondent returnable by 25.05.2021. The notice issued by this Court have been served on the appellant and the respondent through Principal Sessions Judge, Dharwad. Again on 25.05.2021, at the request of the learned counsel for the appellant, matter was posted to 08.06.2021. This Court received an envelope on 07.06.2021 consisting of a letter and an affidavit dated 03.06.2021 purportedly issued by the appellant. In the affidavit sworn to before the notary at Dharwad, the appellant has stated that after discussing with the elders of the family, she has settled the matter with the respondent and that she has decided to withdraw the above appeal as not pressed. When the aforesaid affidavit was read over to the counsel for the appellant, he expressed his inability to confirm the same. Learned counsel for the appellant and respondent, in the circumstances, submitted that the matter be heard on merits and disposed of. Accordingly, matter was taken up for final disposal. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Family Court erred in allowing the petition filed by the respondent dissolving the marriage merely on the ground of appellant not contesting the matter. He submitted that the appellant with fond hope of amicable resolution of matter and resuming the matrimonial life with the respondent, had participated in the mediation process, but unfortunately, to her shock and dismay, respondent had refused to take the appellant resulting in appellant losing all her hopes in the marriage and in her life. Consequently, appellant did not participate in the further proceedings before the Family Court. This led to passing of the order by the Family Court dissolving the marriage. Consequently, appellant did not participate in the further proceedings before the Family Court. This led to passing of the order by the Family Court dissolving the marriage. He further submitted that the Family Court has dissolved the marriage without there being any justifiable ground and in the absence of cogent material evidence. He submitted that though the petition under Section 13(1)(iii)(a) has been dismissed which ought to have led to the dismissal of the entire petition, the Family Court erred in allowing the petition under Section 13(1)(ia) without any basis. He submitted that the Family Court in a cryptic order, without giving any justifiable reason, has dissolved the marriage. Merely because PCR No. 360/2016 and an F.I.R had been registered, the same could not have been the grounds for dissolution of marriage. Hence, seeks for setting aside of the impugned Judgment and Order. Learned counsel in the alternate, submitted that matter may be remanded for fresh consideration providing opportunities to the parties to contest the matter. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent seeks to justify the order passed by the Family Court and submits that the same does not warrant any interference. 10. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 11. The respondent filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia)(iii)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. As regard the averments and allegation made to sustain the petition under Section 13(1)(iii)(a), the Family Court has held the same in negative as the respondent herein failed to establish that the appellant was suffering from Schizophrania. 12. However, the Family Court while answering the point with regard to the petition under Section 13(1)(ia), has referred to PCR No. 376/2016 filed by the respondent before the JMFC, Dharwad. The Family Court has referred to certain photographs purportedly showing abrasion, contusion and bleeding injuries on his back and beneath the eye and concluded that the respondent sustained the said injuries because of the assault by the appellant’s brother. The Family Court in our opinion, erred in attributing cruelty on the part of the appellant on the basis of the alleged injuries suffered by the respondent purportedly caused by the appellant’s brother. The said allegation being subject-matter of the case in PCR No. 360/2016 was only at the crime stage. The Family Court in our opinion, erred in attributing cruelty on the part of the appellant on the basis of the alleged injuries suffered by the respondent purportedly caused by the appellant’s brother. The said allegation being subject-matter of the case in PCR No. 360/2016 was only at the crime stage. There is no material placed on record by the appellant with regard to inquiry, investigation, trial and conclusion of the said proceedings by the JMFC, Dharwad. This, in our considered opinion, cannot be the basis for attributing cruelty on the appellant-wife resulting in dissolution of marriage of the appellant with the respondent. Merely because the appellant has not challenged or contested the case of the respondent, the Family Court ought not to have accepted the version of the respondent. Even assuming that the brother of the appellant had assaulted the respondent, without legally acceptable material evidence, same could not have been relied upon by the trial court. 13. In the aforesaid analysis of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned Judgment and order passed by the Family Court, dissolving the marriage cannot be sustained. 14. In the result, Appeal is allowed. Judgment and Order dated 12.03.2019 passed in M.C. No. 87/2018 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Vijayapura, is hereby set aside.