JUDGMENT : Goutam Bhaduri, J. 1. Heard. 2. The present appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 24.10.2017 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, C.G. in Civil Suit No.91-A/2017 whereby, the petition filed by the husband for decree of divorce was allowed. The present appeal is by the wife. 3. The respondent/husband preferred a suit pleading inter-alia that the marriage between the parties took place on 04.12.2005 at Raipur and thereafter the wife went to Bangalore and stayed there. Subsequently, they could not go along and the wife always used to insult the husband and the dispute between them aggravated and they started living separately. Subsequently, an application was filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage, Act, 1955 wherein after some point of time, compromise was effected. On 22.10.2009, an agreement was drawn and the wife rejoined, however, thereafter when the child Ku. Ananya was born, the wife used to further torture the husband with demand to return back to Bilaspur. It is pleaded that consequently, the husband left his job on 07.06.2015 and wanted to do agriculture but wife did not like it. Thereafter, the husband decided to open a computer training institute; and pursuant thereto sold his house at Bangalore for Rs.5 lakhs; and further arranged Rs.5 lakhs from his relatives & friends; and the entire collection of Rs.10 lakhs was given to the wife. It is further stated at that moment, when one day i.e. on 28th - 29th August, 2016, the husband was not at home, the wife took away the household goods and went away along with the child and further took away the amount entrusted to her of Rs.10 lakhs. It is stated she went to her parental home at Raipur. Thereafter, the family members / relatives tried to settle the dispute between them, but eventually failed and according to the husband, the wife refused to return to her husband despite all efforts made. Therefore, on the ground of cruelty and desertion, the application for divorce was filed. 4. The wife in the reply denied the averments and the allegation made on her. Instead it was stated that because of the torture meted out to her, she was thrown out of the house at Bangalore, therefore, she was forced to live at a hostel. 5. 4. The wife in the reply denied the averments and the allegation made on her. Instead it was stated that because of the torture meted out to her, she was thrown out of the house at Bangalore, therefore, she was forced to live at a hostel. 5. After some time, an application of Section 9 for restitution of conjugal rights was filed, & compromise was effected and the wife joined the company of the husband in the year 2009. During their stay together, a child was born in 2011 but thereafter too the husband used to treat the wife with all cruelty. It is stated that after they came back to Bilapsur on one day, the husband left the house at Bilaspur and consequent thereto, the wife had to leave to go back to her parents for safety & survival and thereafter whereabouts of the husband is not known. She further submitted that no cruelty was meted out by her to the husband and the husband was not entitled to decree of divorce. 6. The learned Family Court after evaluating the facts and evidence granted a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. As such, this appeal by the wife. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant / wife would submit that no evidence is on record to show that the wife has committed any cruelty towards the husband. He would submit on trivial issues, the inflated allegations have been made which would not entitle the husband to claim a divorce. He would further submit that the evidence on record would show that it was at the behest of the husband when the misbehaviour was done by the husband along with the torture, she had to live at a separate residence at Bangalore and thereafter when they came back to Bilaspur, the husband has himself left the job, at that time the wife was left alone before that they were begotten with a child. It is stated by wife that since she was left alone by husband all of a sudden and she had no other means for her livelihood and any amount was also not paid, she had to go back to her father’s place at Raipur along with a child. It is stated at present, the whereabouts of husband is not known despite all efforts made. It is stated at present, the whereabouts of husband is not known despite all efforts made. It is also stated that no maintenance amount was/is paid though it was agreed initially in 2009 that Rs.15,000/- per month would be paid. He submits, therefore, the judgment and decree of the trial Court is completely perverse without any evidence which requires interference by this Court. 8. There is no representation on behalf of the respondent, he remained ex-parte, despite service of notice. On the earlier occasion, a query was made to the appellant that whether any maintenance has been paid or any whereabouts of the husband whether is known or not, it has been submitted today that no maintenance is paid and at present whereabouts of the husband is not in know. 9. Perused the pleading and the evidence. The husband deposed that after the marriage on 04.12.2005, the wife joined his company but used to humiliate him on different issues and without informing at time when she was at Bangalore, she came back to Raipur and filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. wherein after the compromise, she joined back. Ex.D-10 is a certified copy of the order of the Family Court which shows the application was filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the wife wherein a compromise was effected and it was got dismissed on 31.10.2009, therefore, the statement of the husband that after marriage in 2005, she came back without information and deserted the husband do not appear to be correct. 10. Further more, in the statement, the wife deposed that after the marriage when she joined the company of the husband at Bangalore and thereafter when she started a job, it was objected by the husband and she was pressurized to leave her job. She has further deposed that since she did not leave her job as such she was forced to stay out of her matrimonial home and she started living at women’s hostel at Bangalore and stayed there for five to six months. It is stated she tried her best to reconcile, but eventually failed. Therefore, under these circumstances, she had to leave her job and came back to Raipur to her parental home. It is stated she tried her best to reconcile, but eventually failed. Therefore, under these circumstances, she had to leave her job and came back to Raipur to her parental home. As against this, the cross-examination, we do not find any negativity, but on the whole it shows that this stand was maintained that the husband pressurized the wife to leave the job and since wife did not leave the job, difference between them started and she started living separately at women’s hostel at Bangalore. Thereafter, she stated when she contacted the husband, he refused to keep her, and as such they went to the counsellor and husband expressed that he does not want to stay with her. Subsequently, she left her job and came back to Raipur and filed an application under Section 9 for restitution of conjugal rights. Exs. P-6 & P-9 are the applications under Section 125 of Cr.P.C and under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage, Act, 1955 respectively, at the behest of the wife. 11. In such application for restitution of conjugal rights, a compromise was effected on 22.10.2009 which is Ex.D-2 wherein both parties agreed to stay together. The wife agreed to take back the cases under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and it was further agreed if she does not stay with husband, an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month would be paid per month. Ex.D-3 is the compromise order, it shows that the parties settled their dispute as per the statement of the wife and husband thereafter both of them went back to Bangalore and started living together and the child namely Ananya Agrawal was born to them on 15.04.2011. The husband thereafter came back along with the wife to Bilaspur. The evidence shows that they came back to Bilaspur. The husband alleges that an amount of Rs.5 lakhs which was procured by sale of the house at Bangalore and further Rs.5 lakhs which was procured from friends by way of loan was entrusted to the wife which was meant for opening a business of computer, the wife all of a sudden took away the money. On the contrary, the wife says that all of a sudden on 28-29th August, 2016, the uncle of the husband came and there were hot talks took place between them thereafter she was abused and the husband left the house all of a sudden without any information. 12. On the contrary, the wife says that all of a sudden on 28-29th August, 2016, the uncle of the husband came and there were hot talks took place between them thereafter she was abused and the husband left the house all of a sudden without any information. 12. There is no evidence on record to evaluate the facts that the amount of Rs.5 lakhs was procured by sale of the property at Bangalore. Ex.D-4 is an information to the police in the August, 2016 by wife wherein it was stated that they were not being kept properly and even the household expenses were not paid. The husband stated that he cannot bear the expenses and does not want to keep them, therefore, she is going with her father. Reading of Ex.D-4 would show that it is not a case that she herself wanted to go of her own with an intention to desert the husband for all the time but it was a result of a misbehaviour at the end of the husband. She complained that she was forced to go because of the behaviour of the husband. In the statement, the husband / PW-1 stated that wife went away with an amount of Rs.10 lakhs and the child. The nature of allegation, therefore, by the husband as against the wife appears to be trivial in nature and it appears to be lack of compatibility. 13. The backgrounds of the facts would show that initially they were living together and the dispute arose for the reason of the wife joined the service. The wife appears to be highly qualified as she has passed M.Tech from NIT, which is a reputed institution and it is not expected that the wife may succumb to the demand of the husband to leave a job. It is for the husband and wife to adjust themselves of issues between them. The agreement which was initially entered in 2009 Ex.D-2 one of the condition imposed that the wife would only perform a job, it will continue the job “with the permission of the husband.” The agreement further purports that she would spend the amount of salary on herself as also on her husband and the cross-examination of the husband would show that he himself left the home on 28-29th August and called one Shankar Agrawal his uncle and went away leaving the wife along with children. 14. Under these circumstances, without any financial support when the husband has left and was not responding to the phone call as per the admission of the husband, the wife when left for her parental home by writing a letter Ex.D-4, in the circumstances of the case, it appears to be just and proper and it cannot be stated that the wife has committed any cruelty to the husband. 15. To seek a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty, the cruelty is required to be proved that it is beyond the normal expectancy of the human being and not trivial in nature. The evidence shows only complaints & allegations & counter allegations have been made but the nature & degree of allegation do not appear to be such which can be termed as a cruelty of such a nature to envelope it to claim a divorce meted out by the wife. 16. The evidence led by the husband do not bring home any cruelty. The primary reason and nucleus of dispute shows that differences arose between husband and wife; when wife refused to leave her job, and state of mind is more lamented by the language of agreement initially arrived between parties as Ex.D-2. Any inference in given facts would be contrary to the general expectation and imaginary acrobatics that wife would succumb to the demand of the husband in her professional pursuit otherwise it would cause a turbulence in relation resulting a cruelty. 17. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The judgment and decree passed by the Family Court is hereby set aside. 18. A decree be drawn accordingly.