SUSILA DEI Vs. MADHUSUDAN KISAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application under Section 115 Code of Civil Procedure calls in question the interlocutory order dated 8 -4.1970 by which the learned Trial Judge called upon the Defendant wife to begin the evidence at the trial.

(2.) THE Plaintiff who is the husband filed T.S. No. 13 of 1968 for restitution of (sic) rights on the allegation that he and the Defendant were married as husband and wife. For some time the Plaintiff lived in the house of his father -in -law as the latter had promised to educate the Plaintiff further. But as he was ill -treated he left the house and started living independently. When he desired his wife to come and be in his company she did not turn up. Therefore, he filed the suit.

(3.) ON these pleadings the dispute arose as to who would begin. The marriage is admitted. Under the law the wife is bound to live with the husband. She owes an obligation, as long as the marriage tie is sustained, to be in his company and if she raises any defence like ill -treatment, cruelty, desertion, etc., the burden is certainly on her to establish any of these grounds to resist restitution. The learned Trial Judge in my view rightly called upon the Defendant to begin. There is hereby any scope for interference in this case.