VIRENDRA Vs. RAJNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/husband has preferred this appeal under Section 28 of the hindu Marriage Act 1955 (for short `the Act') being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 25. 8. 2003 passed by the First Addl. District Judge, Betul in Civil original Suit No. 41-A/02 passing the decree against him under Section 9 of the act for restitution of conjugal rights.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that the respondent filed the petition under Section 9 of the Act contending that she got married with the appellant on dated 28. 1. 01 in accordance with the rites and rituals of the Hindu community at Arya Samaj, Chicholi. Subsequent to marriage, she was kept by the appellant in good atmosphere for two months but thereafter he harassed her on account of demand of dowry and ultimately she was left by the appellant at her parental home saying that he will bring her back after managing his family members to keep her in his family. It is further contended that on facing the cruelty, she lodged the report under Section 498-A against Mamta and Jugal kishore the relatives of the appellant. She also signed some stamp papers on asking by the appellant and his brother-in-law said Jugal Kishore. Later on, she came to know that same are misused by them for preparing the papers of divorce. The family members of the appellant were used to say that they could not get the dowry because the marriage took place in Arya Samaj. With these averments, she expressed her wish to reside with the appellant and prayed the decree for restitution of conjugal rights.

(3.) IN the written statement of the appellant, the averments of the petition are denied. It is denied that the alleged marriage took place between the parties. In addition, it is pleaded that in their community the marriage is solemnized as per rites and rituals of the community in which various rites like Lagun, Mandap, phaldan, Barat and Saptpadi etc are carried out for Kanyadan. It is also pleaded that as per custom prevailed in their community, the marriage may be dissolved by mutual consent without intervention of the court. The appellant being agriculturist, is educated only upto 8th standard, while the respondent, being postgraduate, is involved in medical profession. It is further pleaded that on developing the love affair with the respondent he was insisted by her family members to reside with them. During that period, against his wish, the alleged marriage was solemnized in a dramatic manner. Subsequent to such marriage, when his father ousted them from his family and was interested to dispose of his property. On such event the respondent tried to snatch his property with different ideas and in continuation of it made a complaint against the appellant for the offence under Section 498-A of the IPC. Besides this, she also filed the petition under Section 125 of the Cr. P. C for maintenance. The same was dismissed by the trial court, against which a revision was filed by her. Inter alia, it is stated that respondent is not his duly married wife, hence she could not get the decree as prayed. Besides this, the dismissal of the petition is also prayed on the ground that divorce took place between them as per custom of the community.