RAMESHCHANDRA Vs. PREMLATA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the husband against the decree for restitution of conjugal rights passed in favour of the respondent wife.

(2.) The facts not in dispute are that the appellant and the respondent were married according to Hindu rites on 14-6-1974 at village Charua Tahsil Harda. After the marriage, the parties lived in the house of the appellant at Harsud for about one year nO issue was born through the wedlock. About 25 days before the festival of Raksha Bandhan in 1975 the father of the respondent moved an application under Section 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in the Court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Harda for a search warrant for production of the respondent. In pursuance to the search warrant the respondent was brought to the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate where she expressed her desire to go along with her father on 19-8-1975. However, on 25-11-1975 the respondent served a notice on the appellant expressing her desire to live with him if he gave an assurance that he would properly treat her in his house. This notice was refused and so no reply was sent.

(3.) The contention of the respondent is that after an year of her marriage the appellant and her mother started ill-treating her. Whenever her father or any other relation came to meet the respondent at Harsud to enquire about her well being she was not permitted to see them. This caused tension and anxiety in her mind being an young newly wedded wife. Therefore, at the time of Raksha Bandhan of 1975, she insisted for going to her parents' house at Charua and since then she is living there. After a month thereafter she was brought by her father to the house of the appellant but he refused to keep her with him. Several attempts were made by her father to restore the normal relationship between the parties but all the attempts failed. Consequentlly, a notice dated 25-11-1975 (Ex. p. 1) was sent to the appellant which was refused by him. The respondent, therefore, claimed for restitution of conjugal rights by filing the petition under Section 9 of the Act.