BABURAO Vs. SUSHILA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal from the decision, of the Additional District Judge, Chhindwara dated 11-4-1961 has been filed by the husband, whose petition for restitution of conjugal rights against the respondent has been rejected. Another appeal (Miscellaneous (first) Appeal No. 26 of 1961) has been. filed by him against the order awarding interim maintenance at the rats of Rs. 25/- per month and for costs amounting to Rs 100/- to the respondent for defending the petition under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called the Act) on 30-1-1961. Both these appeals will be disposed of by this judgment

(2.) IN his petition, the appellant had stated that he was married to the respondent on 26-4-1955; that the respondent lived happily with the appellant for about a year and half at Chhindwara; that the appellant then asked the respondent to accompany him to live at Ramtek but she refused and the appellant went alone to ramtek; that he himself came to take respondent on some occasions but she did not go with him; that he sent a notice on 9-8-1958 to her and her parents requiring her return; that by the reply dated 18-8-1958 (Ex. P. 6) she refused to come back and is still living with her parents at Chhindwara.

(3.) THE respondent opposed the petition, inter alia, on the ground that the appellant actually deserted her within the meaning of Section 9 of the Act; that he was treating her with cruelty and in an uncivilised manner; that the appellant had left her when her pregnancy was of three months' duration and made no arrangement for her delivery; that he was a drunkard and was addicted to gambling; and that he used to neglect providing her even with food and used to take his food outside in some hotel. In short, the petition of the appellant was opposed on the grounds of desertion and legal cruelty.