YAMA Vs. ANKIT MANUBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr.Dipak Patel, learned Advocate, waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and with the consent of learned Counsel for the respective parties, the petition is being heard and decided finally.

(2.) The challenge in this petition, preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, is to the order dated 10.04.2014, passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No. 2, Ahmedabad ("the Family Court" for short), below the application at Exh.5, preferred by the respondent -husband in Family Suit No. 1555 of 2013, whereby the ex -parte order of status -quo granted in favour of the respondent on 15.11.2013, has been confirmed, with certain conditions.

(3.) Briefly stated, the relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner herein is the legally -wedded wife of the respondent. Their marriage took place on 30.04.2006 and out of the wedlock, a daughter, named, Henisha was born on 15.07.2007. Thereafter, on 15.11.2010, the petitioner gave birth to another daughter, named, Shanaya. According to the petitioner, after the birth of the second daughter, the respondent and his family members, who were expecting a son, started torturing her by making false and baseless allegations about her character. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent, encouraged by his family members, was determined to divorce the petitioner because of the birth of a second daughter. The petitioner was pressurized and threatened to such an extent that she was forced to write a letter on 17.02.2012, upon the instructions of the respondent, admitting that she had an illicit relationship with one Chirag Patel. As per the case of the petitioner, because of the threat of divorce, she wrote the said letter as compelled by the respondent. According to the petitioner, she had no relationship of an illicit nature with the said Chirag Patel who is her brother -in -law, being married to a cousin of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that her parents were also made to sign upon the letter under threat of divorce. Ultimately, on 27.02.2013, the petitioner was driven out of the matrimonial house with both her daughters. She was not permitted to take even her own clothes and belongings, or those of daughters, and had to leave the house in the clothes she was wearing. The petitioner had no other option but to go and reside at her paternal house. All the while, the petitioner expected that with the passage of time, the respondent and her in -laws would accept the factum of the birth of the second daughter. However, no positive or constructive action was taken from the side of the respondent. It is further the case of the petitioner that the harassment by the respondent did not stop even after she was made to leave the matrimonial house. Time and again, the respondent used to send the petitioner messages on the mobile phone in abusive language, threatening that he would ensure that their marriage results in a divorce. In those messages, the respondent has not only abused the petitioner but also her relatives, including her father and uncle. The respondent is repeatedly pressurizing the petitioner to give a divorce. However, the petitioner is interested in a reunion with the respondent and in continuing her marriage, in the interest of her two minor daughters. She, therefore, continued to request the respondent not to insist for a divorce. On 15.11.2013, the respondent filed Family Suit No. 1555 of 2013, seeking a declaration to the effect that the petitioner is not entitled to enter the matrimonial house, being, 19, Heritage Residency, Thaltej, Ahmedabad. In addition to the said declaration, the respondent also sought a permanent injunction against the petitioner, along with other ancillary reliefs. Along with the suit, the respondent filed an application at Exh.5, for the grant of a temporary injunction, restraining the petitioner from entering into the matrimonial house. On 15.11.2013, the Family Court granted ex -parte relief of status -quo in favour of the respondent, while issuing notice to the petitioner. Thereafter, the parties were heard. The Family Court allowed the application for interim injunction preferred by the respondent vide the impugned order dated 10.04.2014, which has the effect of injuncting the petitioner and her two minor daughters from entering the matrimonial house. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present petition.