RAJKUMAR PATNI Vs. MANORAMA PATNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE decision rendered in this appeal shall also govern the disposal of another connected first appeal being F. A. No. 319/94 as both these appeals arise out of a common judgment and the decree. In fact they are in the nature of cross appeals - one filed by plaintiff and other by defendant. The present first appeal under Section 96 of C. P. Code is by the defendant (husband) against the judgment and decree dated 27. 6. 1990 passed in C. S. No. 7/88 by 1st Additional District Judge, Shajapur. In order to appreciate the factual scenerio of this litigation, it is necessary to state the facts in brief.

(2.) IT is in fact an unfortunate litigation between the wife and husband. Plaintiff is the wife and husband is the defendant. Wife has sued her husband for return of her Stridhan property in specie, or in the alternatively its value which according to wife works out to Rs. 1,49,140/ -. In short and in substance, the case of wife in her plaint was that she married to defendant on 27. 2. 1977 according to Hindu custom at Sarangpur. It was alleged that out of this wedlock two sons and one daughter were born. It was then alleged that off and on, the defendant (husband) used to ill-treat the wife, would make demand of dowry, would beat her. AH this hostile attitude of husband continued upto 5. 9. 1986 when ultimately, it went out of wife's tolerance. She was forced to withdraw from his society. It was alleged that since September, 1986, wife has been living separately with her parents alongwith her three children. It was alleged that it is no longer possible for the wife to any more continue and live with her husband. She, therefore, claimed that whatever property. she had received in her marriage and also the property which according to her is her Stridhan property which is in custody and possession of her husband i. e. defendant be returned to her. The plaintiff then gave details of these properties in para 6 of plaint which according to her was her exclusive Stridhan. Essentially on these pleadings suit was filed.

(3.) THE husband (defendant) denied the plaint allegations. In substance, his defence was that his relations with wife i. e. plaintiff were throughout cordial. According to him, the plaintiff had gone to her parental house of her own and when he went to take her, she declined to come and said that her life with him is in danger. It was alleged that under these circumstances, the husband then filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act which is still pending. It was then alleged that so far as gift items are concerned, that cannot be treated as plaintiff's property but it has to be treated as that of husband. The defendant also denied the list of several properties set out in the plaint and alleging that only one golden ring and two silver ornaments, some stainless steel articles, some pital articles, one steel bag, furniture, table fan etc. were given. It was denied that all this property is a Stridhan property on which plaintiff can lay any legitimate claim. The defendant offered to keep wife with him. It was also alleged that neither the suit is maintainable, nor the Court where the suit is filed has jurisdiction to try it. These were essentially the pleadings which were set up by way of defence in the written statement.