LAWS(BOM)-2009-7-98

MANJU KAMAL MEHRA Vs. KAMAL PUSHKAR MEHRA

Decided On July 18, 2009
MANJU KAMAL MEHRA Appellant
V/S
KAMAL PUSHKAR MEHRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals filed by the respective spouses arise from a common judgment and order dated 31.12.2004 passed by the Family Court at Pune in Petition No. A-978 of 2002 and hence they are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) The parties were married at Mumbai on 12.7.1994 as per Hindu rites and they co-habitated at Dahisar where a daughter by name Aishwarya was born to the couple on 21.12.1995. As per the husband, the wife did not return to the matrimonial home after the daughter was borne. The husband claims that the wife abandoned the matrimonial home, whereas it is the case of the wife that she was thrown out of the matrimonial home before the birth of the child that is some time in September, 1995. In July, 1996, the wifes younger sister Anju was married and the husband along with his family member attended the said marriage. The couple stayed together from 22nd to 26th July, 1996 in the house of the wifes parents but after 26th July, 1996, the wife did not return to the matrimonial home. It appears that the wife was working with M/s.R.G. Stone Hospital and she claimed that she left the said job from 4.5.1998. The husband issued a legal notice on 30.4.2001 (Exhibit-23, which was reply on 10.5.2001, Exhibit-24). Second legal notice was issued on 8.6.2001 (Exhibit-25, which was replied on 15.6.2001, Exhibit-26). Third legal notice was issued on 12.6.2001 (Exhibit-27) and consequently a joint meeting between the two parties on 6.5.2002 to resolve matrimonial dispute was held. It was decided in the said meeting that both the parties should forget the past and start staying together. The wife conveyed that she was ready and willing to co-habit with the Petitioner and her father also supported the same plea and stated that his daughter must return to the matrimonial home at Dahisar. Despite the settlement, there was no cohabitation between the parties and therefore, Petition No. A-978 of 2002 was moved by the husband to seek a decree of restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The said Petition was opposed by the wife. The following issues were framed by the Family Court and answered accordingly in the impugned judgment:

(3.) However, it appears that when Petition No. A-978 of 2002 was decided by the earlier judgment dated 30.4.2004, the Family Court had not recorded its findings on issue Nos. 1 and 4-A. The said judgment was the subject matter of challenge in Family Court Appeal Nos. 94 of 2004 and 95 of 2004 and by a common judgment dated 18.8.2004, the Appeals were disposed off and the Petition filed by the husband was remanded to the Family Court to record its findings on issue Nos. 1 and 4-A.