KIRAN PASI Vs. SUBHASHCHANDRA PASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals have been preferred by the appellant-wife under Section 19 of the Family Court Act, 1984 for setting aside the common judgment dated 05.08.2014 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No. 150-A/2012 and 151-A/2012 whereby restitution of conjugal rights has been granted in favour of the respondent-husband and appellant's application for divorce has been refused. As both these cases arise out of a common order, therefore, we propose to deal with the matters analogously and dispose of both the appeals by this common judgment.

(2.) It is not disputed that the appellant is the wife of respondent and their marriage was solemnized on 20.04.2008 as per Hindu rites and customs. Brief facts of the case is that, sometime after the marriage, the respondent-husband deserted the appellant-wife. The respondent and his family members demanded Rs. 3 lakhs from the appellant-wife to purchase a house. When the demand was not fulfilled, they harassed her. The respondent did not support the appellant and was not interested to take her to Delhi, where the respondent was working. The family members of the respondent compelled her to give away her salary to them and when the appellant refused to do so, she was thrown out of the house. Hence, the appellant filed a complaint under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against the respondent and his family members. The appellant-wife was not interested to reside with the respondent. A petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was filed by her husband which deserves to be dismissed. On the above grounds the appellant-wife prayed for a decree of divorce in her favour under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

(3.) In his reply, the respondent-husband denied the allegations and submitted that the appellant was working as a Jr. Engineer in Railways at Jabalpur. Before their marriage, they had met each other. After their marriage, the appellantwife resided with the respondent only for few days. Thereafter, she was not inclined to reside with the respondent. Appellant-wife blamed the respondent that he had illicit relationship with another lady named Mrs. Sonal Satpati which created dispute between them. On 10.02.2009, she left her matrimonial house and went to reside with her parents. She also took her ornaments, clothes and scooty. Her parents were dependent on the income of the appellant. Therefore, the respondent claimed that he is entitled to restitution of conjugal rights against the appellant. The petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act deserves to be dismissed.