IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA --------- Miscellaneous Appeal No.118 of 2010 ------- Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 24-2-2007 passed by Additional Principal judge, Family Court, Patna in Matrimonial Case No. 125 of 1999 ------- Jagdish Chandra Singh, son of late Ram Dahin Singh R/o Pachtaki Ram, P.S. Bairagania, District- Sitamarhi at present working as Assistant in Bihar Public Service Commissioner, Patna............................... Appellant Versus Smt. Madhuri Singh, W/o Jagdish Chandra Singh, R/o Flat No. 197/800, Shastrinagar, P.S. Shastrinagar, Disttirct- Patna......................................Respondent ------ 9 1-12-2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent at the stage of Order 41 Rule 11 C.P.C. This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 24-2-2007 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna whereby Matrimonial Case No. 125 of 1999 under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been dismissed after a detailed discussion of the case of both the parties and evidence adduced by them. The marriage was solemnized in the year 1974. Admittedly two sons and one daughter were born out of the wed-lock. The appellant has recently superannuated from 2 service under the State of Bihar. The main ground for seeking divorce was an allegation that the respondent-wife has developed illicit relationship with a God-man ( Tantrik). That Tantrik, who was opposite party no.4 in the court below, died during the pendency of the proceeding before the court below itself. The respondent contested the suit by filing written statement denying all the allegations. She has levelled counter allegations against the appellant that he is a man of bad character and left the respondent in order to keep another lady. It is the case of the respondent that she has suffered only because she protested against such action of the appellant. While elder son staying with the respondent has supported her case the younger son residing with the appellant has attempted to support the case of the appellant. On going through the oral evidence, the court below has found difficulty in accepting the case of the appellant and the court has held that he could not establish that respondent had illicit relationship with the Tantrik and that she was living in adultery.The evidence on record as 3 well as the circumstances, according to which the elder son always resided with the respondent, do not persuade us to take a different view.We are also of the view that the court below has correctly appreciated the materials on record and has come to a correct finding and as such there is no merit in this appeal. It is dismissed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Shivaji Pandey,J)