SK AKBAR Vs. AAYESHABEE W/O SK AKBAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HUSBAND (henceforth for the sake of brevity, we are going to refer to the parties as husband and wife) has approached this Court feeling aggrieved by judgment delivered by Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad, on 5.2.2004 thereby dismissing Petition No.A-271/2003 filed by husband for restitution of conjugal rights.

(2.) IT appears that husband approached the Family Court, Aurangabad, with petition presented on 20.4.2003 praying for suitable directions to wife to resume cohabitation with husband. Admittedly, the parties were married on 28.6.1998, according to customs and rites applicable to their community. It is the contention of husband that wife cohabited happily for couple of months or little more. Thereafter, she picked up quarrels with husband and his relatives on flimsy reasons. She frequently departed for the place of parents. She insisted for staying separate from the parents of husband. Husband also alleges that wife left on many occasions with all clothes and ornaments and when husband enquired about such odd behaviour on the part of wife, she threatened him that she would commit suicide. On 7.3.2000, husband had complained to Women's Cell in the office of Commissioner at Parbhani. Because of these efforts on the part of husband, wife resumed cohabitation for some period, but lateron she started demanding divorce. Consequently, husband sent a notice dated 1.2.2003 to wife, which was returned unserved. (The envelope is filed on record at Exhibit 11 and it can be seen that Postman had returned it because the addressee was not available at the residence inspite of visits on 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 10th and 11th February, 2003. It is not a notice "refused" in the strict sense, but it is a notice "unclaimed" by wife). Husband, thus, has contended that wife has withdrawn from his society without any reasonable cause and, therefore, prayed for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights.

(3.) AS can be seen from the record of the original proceeding, only parties entered the box in order to support their respective claims and they were not represented by the lawyers. Apart from Exhibit 11, unclaimed notice produced by husband, in the record there is xerox copy of notice reply dated 27.6.2001. Apparently this seems to be a reply to the notice by husband dated 12.6.2001. This is marked by learned Judge of Family Court as Article B. There is another document (xerox copy) marked as Article A by learned Judge of Family Court, which appears to be copy of the complaint by husband to PSI, MIDC, CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad.