SHUBHA Vs. H. SATISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal and revision petition have been filed by the wife which arise out of common judgment dtd. 19/6/2015 passed in M.C.No.80/2014 and Crl.Misc.No.326/2013. By the aforesaid common judgment, the Family Court has allowed the petition filed by the husband under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and has dismissed the petition filed by the wife under Sec. 125 of the Cr.P.C. The appeal and revision petition were therefore heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal and revision petition, briefly stated are that the marriage between the parties was performed on 21/5/1987 in Basaveshwara Kalyana Mantapa, Hassan. Out of the wedlock, a son and a daughter namely Sharath and Niharika were born to them. It is not in dispute that the son namely Sharath has completed his graduation in Engineering and is assisting the husband in her business. Similarly, daughter namely Niharika has also completed her graduation in Engineering and is under the care and custody of the husband. The husband filed a petition under Sec. 9 of the Act on 2/4/2014 seeking restitution of conjugal rights. It was inter alia pleaded in the petition that the husband on 30/9/2012 at about 3 a.m., picked up a quarrel with the wife on the ground of alleged illicit relationship. The wife, however, refuted the allegations made by the husband. However, the wife left the matrimonial home and started residing with her sister. However, despite efforts being made by the husband, the wife did not join the matrimonial home. The husband thereupon filed a petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights.

(3.) The wife, on being served with the notice of the proceedings, filed statement of objections in which the relationship between the parties as well as the factum of birth of children was admitted. However, remaining averments made in the petition were denied. It was averred that the husband, after the death of his mother, used to suspect the chastity of the wife and prevented her from giving public performances as veena player. It was also pleaded that the husband pressurized the wife to accept that she was having illicit relationship with other persons. However, when the wife refused to accept the same, she was ill-treated and harassed by the husband. Thereupon, she left the matrimonial home. It was also pleaded that since the wife had filed a petition seeking maintenance, therefore, as a counter blast, this petition under Sec. 9 of the Act was filed. The husband examined himself as PW-1 and exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P3. The wife examined herself and did not produce any document.