PADMA Vs. DILIP KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a wife's first appeal from a decree for restitution of conjugal rights.

(2.) The parties were married on 31st Jan., 1978. The parents of both the parties lived at Allahabad at a distance of about half a mile from each other. According to the husband's case, as set out in the petition for restitution of conjugal rights that was presented by him in the district court, after the marriage, the wife lived with him for short intervals but she preferred her parents house to his, and had all along "been neglecting her household duties and matrimonial obligations" towards him, although she was treated by him and his parents with great affection and love. She was under the influence of her parents. Her father was a retired employee of the Electric Supply Undertaking and found it difficult to support his family. The wife and her parents wanted and pressed him to live separately from his parents and shoulder their burden also. To this he did not agree. The wife's parents got so annoyed at this ; that they came several times to his residence and quarrelled with him and also tried to harass his parents with the help of the police. He had also reported "atrocities" of the wife's parents to the police on 12th April, 1978. This is followed by the allegation that with the intention "to fulfill their selfish moto under duress and pressure", the wife's mother came to his house "on 27-3-78 in the absense of his family members, and took away" the wife with the ornaments and clothes as specified at the foot of the petition, without the "consent and any information to the husband." On coming to know of the wife's departure when the husband and his father went to her parents and asked him to send her back with ornaments etc., she refused to come and live with the husband "under the influence and collusion of her parents." It is alleged that the wife and her parents abused and insulted the husband and his father 'badly', and "they also threatended with dire consequences" if the husband or any other member of his family went to them again to bring the wife back.

(3.) This is followed by the allegation of an attempt for amicable settlement of the matter, but in the very next breath it is said that the wife's mother came again to the husband's house next day and "quarrelled with him unnecessarily and refused to send her daughter and return his ornaments etc." The allegation is then made that the husband has come to know now that the wife "in collusion with her parents is going to marry her with someone else against the heavy money." The next allegation made in the petition is that the "wife being under the thorough influence of her parents" has deli. berately neglected her duties as a spouse and her refusal to live with the husband "amounts to abandoning him without any just and reasonable excuse." It is then said that all the husband's efforts to bring the wife back to his residence inspite of the registered notice dated 20th Nov., 1978 having failed, it had become necessary to file the suit.