LAWS(MPH)-2014-7-194

ATUL KUMAR JAIN Vs. MAMTA JAIN

Decided On July 30, 2014
ATUL KUMAR JAIN Appellant
V/S
Mamta Jain Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/husband has instituted this appeal under Section 19 of the Family Court Act read with Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 assailing the judgment dated 27.08.2009 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gwalior in Case No. 150A/2007(H.M.A.) by which the learned Family Court disallowed the application filed by the appellant/husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage.

(2.) IT is not disputed that the appellant and respondent are husband and wife. Their marriage was solemnized on 19.11.1995 by observing Hindu rites.

(3.) THE non -applicant wife resisted the petition for divorce. She claimed that the applicant/appellant had filed an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act which was earlier registered as Case No. 59A/1999(H.M.A.) subsequently transferred to the Family Court and registered as Civil Suit No. 33A/2002 and was decided on 07.12.2004 in which the decree of divorce was granted. The respondent wife challenged this decree before the High Court which was instituted as F.A. No. 04/2005. The Hon'ble High Court dismissed the same vide judgment dated 20.05.2006. This judgment is operating as res judicata against the appellant husband. The appellant husband and his family members were demanding dowry and received Rs. 5,21,000/ - as dowry and were demanding Maruti Car, Colour Television and Rs. 5,00,000/ - cash. The appellant/husband did not comply with the decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The non -applicant wife filed execution for restitution of conjugal rights. She has stated that she is always prepared to live with the appellant/husband but the appellant husband did not want to live with the respondent/wife. It is not true that before her marriage she lost her vision. When she had gone to put wet clothes on the terrace her mother -in -law pushed her. She suffered an injury. Since, then she lost her sight. She has claimed the gold ornaments allegedly taken from her by her in laws and cash of Rs. 5,21,000/ - given to the appellant husband at the time of marriage. The non applicant wife prayed to provide permanent alimony U/s. 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 at the rate of Rs. 8,000/ - per month from the appellant/husband and also demanded compensation under Section 35A of CPC.