SHAILENDRA KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA Vs. RENUKA SHRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Balod, Civil District Durg (CG) in Civil Suit No. 3-A/99 dated 22.12.2000, wherein the said Court had granted a decree of restitution of conjugal rights in favour of the respondent.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that sister of the appellant was married to the brother of the respondent and the appellant married to the respondent. The respondent has pleaded before the trial Court that she has been treated with cruelty by the appellant, but ignoring this fact, the trial Court has directed for restitution of conjugal rights in favour of the respondent. When she alleges cruelty then she has a right to file a suit for separation but, restitution cannot be granted in her favour. The respondent has committed inordinate delay in filing the suit, therefore, decree in her favour ought not to have been granted. Contention of the appellant is that intention of the respondent is malafide as she is willing to implicate him in criminal case, therefore, finding of the trial Court is not proper.

(3.) Decree of restitution of conjugal rights is granted by the trial Court under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which reads as under :