SMT. SAVITA Vs. NARESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of both FAO No. 143 -M of 1988 and FAO No. 144 -M of 1988, as the question of law involved in these appeals is common.

(2.) THE respondent -husband filed petition for dissolution of marriage alleging that the marriage -between the parties took place on 9.5.1983 and a female child was born, aged about 2 -1/2 years at the time of filing of the petition in the trial Court (in the year 1987). The child must be now about 17 years of age. It was further alleged that wife had gone to her parental home in the last week of May, 1986 to see her parents, but refused to return, which led the husband to file a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which was decreed on 18.11.1986, The wife contested the petition and submitted that she had resumed co -habilitation after the decree dated 18.11.1986 and that she was willing and ready to live with her husband.

(3.) COUNSEL for the appellant argued that the findings of the trial Court holding that the wife did not resume cohabitation after the passing of the decree was erroneous and that the wife was ready and willing to join the husband, but the husband was neglecting the wife, as well as minor child was thus, taking advantage of his own wrong. It was also submitted that though vide order dated 10.10.1988, the respondent -husband restrained from re -marriage, he had married again and was having children.