DEVINDER KAUR Vs. AMARJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated January 11, 1988, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, whereby Subordinate Judge 1st Class (exercising powers of District Judge under the Act) decreed the husband's petition for restitution of conjugal rights.

(2.) THE parties were married in October, 1981. From the marriage they have two children. The case of the husband is that in March, 1985, the father of the wife took her away when she was expecting her second child saying that she would be sent back three/four months after the delivery of the child. Even after the delivery of the child, however, she was not sent back. The husband made efforts to bring her, but to no purpose. The petition was contested. The learned Trial Court framed necessary issues and husband's evidence was concluded on April 27, 1987. Thereafter, the case was adjourned from time to time for wife's evidence and as many as eight adjournments took place. Ultimately, the wife failed to produce any evidence and her case was closed by order of Court dated January 8, 1988. On the basis of that the material on record, the learned Trial Court decreed the case of the husband Aggrieved with the same, the wife has preferred this appeal.

(3.) THE main contention of Mr. Khunger, learned Counsel for the appellant is that at one stage the appellant had brought two witnesses. They were not examined. He further submitted that if one opportunity is given, the wife would produce her evidence at her own responsibility. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I agree with the submission made above. It will be in the interest of justice if the appellant-wife is given a reasonable opportunity of producing the evidence at her own responsibility. No costs are being awarded because it is at the instance of the wife that the case is being re-opened and the facts do not justify burdening her with any costs at this stage. Accordingly, the judgment and decree dated January 11, 1988, are set aside and the case remitted to the Trial Court for granting a reasonable opportunity of producing the evidence to the appellant. The appellant will honour the undertaking made by her learned Counsel in this Court. Thereafter, the case will be decided according to law. As the matter is hanging fire for a long time, it is further directed that the Trial Court shall re-decide the matter according to law within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Parties through their Counsel are directed to appear in the Trial Court on August 24, 1993 for further proceedings. Both the parties are directed to co-operate in the expeditious disposal of the matter.