JUDGMENT (Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act 1984, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.02.2020 passed in F.C.O.P.No.205 of 2018 on the file of the Family Court, Vellore, Vellore District and consequently allow the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.) S. Sounthar, J. 1. Aggrieved by the dismissal of his petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty, on the file of the Learned Family Court, Vellore, Vellore District in F.C.O.P.No.205 of 2018, the husband has filed this appeal. 2. According to the appellant/petitioner/husband his marriage with respondent was solemnized on 12.10.2010. At the time of marriage, appellant was working in C.R.P.F. and the marriage was solemnized when he came back to his native place on one month leave. 3. The appellant alleged that when he came back in the month of February 2011, the respondent started quarrel with him and pressed for separate residence. The appellant heeding to her request set up a separate residence at kaniyambadi. Through wedlock with the respondent, a female child was born on 06.08.2012. He further alleged that he had given his bank salary account ATM card to respondent in February 2011 and by using that card she withdrew a sum of Rs.20.00 lakhs during the period from February 2011 to July 2015. When the appellant was posted at Gujarat, he requested respondent to join him at Gujarat but she refused. On his petition to All Women Police Station, Vellore and on the advise of police, respondent joined appellant at Gujarat. Subsequently, she withdrew from matrimonial home and returned to her parent's house on 09.07.2018 and since then she has been living away from matrimonial home. The appellant alleged the following acts of cruelties: a) the respondent had cultivated the habit of non cooperation and subjected appellant to lot of verbal abuse. b) the respondent had denied sex to appellant and whenever he approached respondent, she threatened to kill him by showing knife. During her stay in matrimonial home at Gujarat both of them slept in separate rooms. c) the respondent has the habit of insulting appellant's parents and she refused to perform her duties as a wife. d) the respondent withdrew Rs.20.00 lakhs from the salary account of appellant without his knowledge by using his ATM card. The respondent caused loss of Rs.45,000/- by admitting the child in an international school. c) the respondent has the habit of insulting appellant's parents and she refused to perform her duties as a wife. d) the respondent withdrew Rs.20.00 lakhs from the salary account of appellant without his knowledge by using his ATM card. The respondent caused loss of Rs.45,000/- by admitting the child in an international school. f) When the appellant tried for reunion, the respondent put forwarded unacceptable conditions. On these pleadings the appellant sought for divorce on the ground of cruelty. 4. The respondent filed her counter denying averments found in the petition for divorce filed by the husband. She averred that from the date of marriage, the appellant failed to perform his duties as a husband and he was totally addicted to alcohol and due to influence of alcohol, he ill treated respondent. She further submitted that the mother of the appellant also ill treated her during her stay at matrimonial home. It was also alleged that the moment appellant leave his parental house for joining duty, she would be sent out of matrimonial house. She further averred that All Women Police got an undertaking letter from appellant that he would take care of respondent and her child and based on that undertaking she joined appellant and settled at Gujarat. The appellant started committing cruelty on the respondent after she joined him at Gujarat. The respondent also expressed her willingness to join the appellant in matrimonial home and sought for dismissal of the divorce petition. 5. Before the Family Court, the appellant was examined as P.W.1., his father was examined as P.W.2, his maternal uncle was examined as P.W.3 and his neighbor was examined as P.W.4. In support of his allegations of cruelty committed by respondent, he marked Exs.P.1 to P.3 on his behalf. The respondent examined herself as R.W.1 and no document was filed on her side. The learned Family Court on examination of oral and documentary evidence available on record came to the conclusion that appellant failed to substantiate his plea of cruelty committed by respondent and hence dismissed the petition for divorce. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant/husband has come up with this appeal. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondent denied conjugal bliss to the appellant and picked up frequent quarrel with the appellant and the same would amount to mental cruelty as defined under the Hindu Marriage Act. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant/husband has come up with this appeal. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondent denied conjugal bliss to the appellant and picked up frequent quarrel with the appellant and the same would amount to mental cruelty as defined under the Hindu Marriage Act. He further submitted that the respondent never made any attempt for reunion and it was only the appellant who made attempt for reunion. The learned counsel further submitted that the Family Court failed to take into consideration the evidence of P.W.2 to P.W.4 which corroborated with the evidence of P.W.1 and consequently, the order passed by the Family Court is vitiated by non consideration of material evidence available on record. 7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the acts of cruelty pleaded by the appellant in his petition would not amount to cruelty within the meaning of Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act. He submitted that admissions of P.W.1 and P.W.2 about series of medical termination of pregnancy undergone by respondent would falsify the averment of the appellant that respondent denied conjugal bliss to him. The learned counsel further submitted that even as per the admissions of the appellant side witnesses, it was appellant who had given undertaking to All Women Police that he would treat the respondent properly and hence the acts of cruelties pleaded by appellant are liable to be rejected. 8. Based on the pleadings, evidence available on record and contentions of the counsel appearing for both the sides, the following points are arising for consideration in this appeal. 1) Whether the appellant/husband proved the acts cruelty pleaded by him? 2) Whether the order passed by the Family Court in dismissing the petition for divorce requires any interference by this Court? 9. The appellant in order to prove various acts of cruelty pleaded by him examined 4 witnesses. He himself was examined as P.W.1. P.W.2 is his father, P.W.3 is his maternal uncle and P.W.4 is his neighbor. The perusal of the evidence of P.W.3 and P.W.4, make it clear that they are only hear say witnesses and they have no direct knowledge about the friction in the family life of the appellant and respondent. Therefore, their evidence is not useful to prove the acts of cruelty pleaded by the appellant/husband. 10. The perusal of the evidence of P.W.3 and P.W.4, make it clear that they are only hear say witnesses and they have no direct knowledge about the friction in the family life of the appellant and respondent. Therefore, their evidence is not useful to prove the acts of cruelty pleaded by the appellant/husband. 10. The appellant as P.W.1 admitted that at his instance the respondent had undergone medical termination of pregnancy for 2 or 3 times. He also admitted that the respondent got conceived when she was staying with him at Gujarat. In the petition filed by him, the appellant pleaded that respondent during her stay at Gujarat denied conjugal bliss and both of them were sleeping in separate rooms. However, when he was examined as P.W.1, during the cross examination, he admitted that the respondent got conceived while she was staying at Gujarat. Therefore, the main act of cruelty pleaded by husband that respondent/wife refused to conjugal bliss is falsified by his own admission. The admission of husband as P.W.1 was further corroborated by admission of P.W.2 who is none other than his father. During the cross examination of P.W.2, he admitted that respondent had undergone medical termination of pregnancy twice. Therefore, it is clear that the appellant has come to Court with a false averment as if, respondent had denied conjugal bliss to him, with a sole object of getting divorce. 11. The respondent in her counter averred that the appellant was addicted to alcohol and he used to torture the respondent under the influence of alcohol. P.W.2, the father of the appellant admitted during his cross examination that his son, namely the appellant herein had the habit of taking alcohol. He further admitted that the husband/appellant used to torture her under influence of alcohol and consequently, appellant gave an undertaking before the police that he would take care of his wife namely respondent in a proper manner and on such undertaking had taken her to Gujarat. These admissions of father of appellant as P.W.2, coupled with the own admissions of P.W.1 destroy the averments found in the petition for divorce. Though appellant pleaded other acts of cruelties absolutely there is no acceptable evidence available on record. The evidence of appellant side witness are not sufficient to prove the case of the appellant that the respondent committed cruelty. Though appellant pleaded other acts of cruelties absolutely there is no acceptable evidence available on record. The evidence of appellant side witness are not sufficient to prove the case of the appellant that the respondent committed cruelty. Therefore, we concur with the findings of the Family Court, Vellore, Vellore District. that appellant failed to prove his plea of cruelty. 12. In view of the discussions made above, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs. 13. In nut shell: i) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed by confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 14.02.2020 made in F.C.O.P.No.205 of 2018 on the file of the Family Court, Vellore, Vellore District. ii) There shall be no order as to costs.