MAYA DEVI Vs. BHURA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri J.S. Tomar, holding brief of Sri R.S. Tomar, learned counsel for the appellant.

(2.) List revised. None appears for the respondent, in either call.

(3.) Present appeal has been filed under Sec. 96 CPC read with Sec. 29 of the Hindu Marriage Act arising from judgment and order dtd. 20/12/1986 passed by District Judge, Rampur in Original Suit No. 31 of 1986, whereby the learned Court below has dissolved the marriage between the parties. Learned Court below has recorded a clear finding that earlier the respondent had instituted Suit No. 6 of 1984 (Bhoora Lal Vs. Smt. Maya) seeking restitution of conjugal rights. The same was decreed, though ex parte, on 18/9/1984. Despite expiry of one year, the appellant did not agree to cohabitation. Thus, the matrimonial relationship between the parties remained broken for more than the statutory period of one year, after the grant of decree of restitution of conjugal rights. Learned Court below has disbelieved the oral evidence led by the appellant after taking note of the inconsistencies in the defendant's evidence. According to the appellant, she had cohabited with the respondent during Diwali of the year 1984. In proof thereof, she relied on Rs.5000.00 given to the respondent on Diwali in the year 1984. At the same time, the father of the appellant namely, Chet Ram/DW-2 contradicted that statement. According to him, that amount of Rs.5000.00 was given to the respondent in the month of July, 1984 i.e. before the grant of decree of restitution of conjugal rights on 18/9/1984. Even as to the occurrence of the Panchayat, the oral evidence led by the appellant was found contradicted with that led by her father/DW-2.