K.S. SIVA DAS Vs. K. LEKHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has challenged the order dated 20.04.2015, whereby the learned Family Court has allowed the application filed by the respondent-wife under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('the Act', for short).

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant, K.S. Siva, and the respondent No. 1, K. Lekha, were married on 15.09.2000, at Thiruvananthapuram, (Kerala), in accordance with the Hindu customs and rites. At the time of the marriage, the appellant was working in a construction company at Secunderabad, Andhra Pradesh and the respondent-wife was working in S.D.M. Dental Science College, Dharwad. According to the appellant, the respondent-wife stayed with him for a week. Thereafter, she returned to resume her duties at the Dental College, Dharwad. During the marriage, the appellant claims that he would visit the wife at Dharwad, and request the respondent-wife to resume company, and to shift to Secunderabad, and to stay in the matrimonial home. He had even tried to find a job for her in the Army Dental College, Secunderabad, but she refused to stay with him at Secunderabad. During the marriage, on 06.07.2002, the respondent-wife delivered a female child, Meghana. According to the appellant, subsequently it is noticed upon his stay at Dharwad, that his wife would leave the house early in the morning and would return to the house late at night. Therefore, he suspected that she was having adulterous affair with one Mr. Arvind. Due to the adulterous behavior of his wife, he filed a divorce petition on the ground of adultery.

(3.) During the pendency of the divorce petition, the respondent-wife, in turn, filed an application under Section 9 of the Act. In order to establish their respective case, the appellant examined himself as witness and the respondent-wife examined three witnesses including Mr. Arvind and his wife, Smt. Bharati, as R.Ws. 2 and 3. The appellant-husband also submitted certain documents. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Family Court dismissed the divorce petition, but allowed the application for restitution of conjugal right under Section 9 of the Act. Hence, this appeal before this Court.