POOJA Vs. SOURABH KHUSHWAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has preferred First Appeal under Sec. 19 of Family Court Act, 1984 challenging judgment and decree dtd. 04/01/2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Mandla in RCS HM No.46/2023. Trial Court found issue No.2 as proved. It was held that it is admitted fact that decree of restitution of conjugal rights was passed on 27/12/2017 in favour of appellant-wife. Respondent had challenged the same by filing First Appeal No.2183/2019, which was dismissed on 09/06/2022 and judgment and decree has become final. Trial Court categorically held that after passing of judgment and decree of restitution of conjugal rights appellant did not go to live alongwith respondent. Respondent made efforts to bring appellant to his house. Notice dtd. 27/03/2023 was given and reply to said notice (Ex.P-3) was filed on 06/04/2023. He also went to house of appellant on 27/11/2019 to bring her back. Appellant did not made any effort to file execution under Order 21 Rule 32(1) of CPC to execute decree and get the property of respondent attached if he is refusing to comply with judgment and decree. In these circumstances trial Court held that respondent was able to prove that there was no resumption of marital ties for more than one year after passing of decree of restitution of conjugal rights dtd. 27/12/2017. Petition was allowed and decree of divorce was granted under Sec. 13(1A)(ii) of Hindu marriage Act, 1955.

(2.) Counsel for appellant has challenged finding of trial Court on grounds that appellant always wanted to live with respondent. Appellant had put certain conditions on respondent before she could comply with decree. It is submitted that appellant wanted that respondent shall keep her properly without committing any violence and take care of her. It is submitted that today also appellant is ready to go and live alongwith respondent. It cannot be said that appellant is not living with respondent without any reasonable cause or excuse. Trial Court has committed error of law in passing judgment and decree of divorce.

(3.) Counsel appearing for respondent supported the judgment and decree. It is submitted that there was no resumption of marital ties between appellant and respondent for period of more than one year after passing of decree of restitution of conjugal rights on 27/12/2017. No fault can be found in the order passed by trial Court. Appeal be dismissed.