SONAL AASHISH MADHAPARIYA Vs. AASHISH HARJIBHAI MADHAPARIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal under section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, the appellant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 28.05.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhuj ­Kachchh (hereinafter referred to as the "Family Court") in Family Suit No.77 of 2016, whereby the Family Court has granted a decree of restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in favour of the respondent.

(2.) The facts stated briefly are that the respondent ­husband filed a petition under section 9 of the Act in the Court of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bhuj ­Kachchh being Marriage Petition No.111 of 2015, seeking a decree of restitution of conjugal rights. In the said petition, the respondent has inter alia stated that the engagement took place with the consent of their family members and continued for a long time and thereafter, their marriage was solemnised as per the rites and rituals of the parties on 1.1.2009 at village Madhapar. From the wedlock, a daughter, named, Vedanshi was born, who, at present is in the custody of the appellant. The parties are 'Patel' by caste and the parties are originally residents of village Madhapar.

(3.) In response to the averments made in the petition filed by the respondent, the appellant filed a reply inter alia stating that the petition is a counterblast to the application filed by her under the Domestic Violence Act. That, with a view to escape liability of paying maintenance to the appellant and her daughter, the present petition has been filed with a mala fide motive. It is further stated that the respondent had continuously subjected her to mental and physical harassment and has spoiled her married life. It is further stated that the respondent has not cared to inquire about her and their daughter for the last three years and that her father has been supporting her financially and has also made arrangement of a separate house for her. The main refrain in her reply is that the respondent is not paying anything towards maintenance and wants to wriggle out of his responsibilities, and hence, he has filed the present petition.