USHA RANI Vs. SURINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal has been filed by the appellant wife against the judgment and decree dated 25.01.2014 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Abohar (Exercising the powers of District Judge under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955). In terms of the impugned judgment and decree, the petition of the respondent husband seeking restitution of conjugal rights has been allowed.

(2.) THE marriage between the parties was solemnised at Village Ramsara as per Hindu rites and ceremonies on 11.12.2010. After marriage, the parties lived together as husband and wife. From their marriage, they had a daughter, namely, Palak alias Phalguni. The respondent husband alleged that the appellant was mentally ill and at times, she lost control of herself, besides, she became unconscious. The respondent husband complained of said ailment to the parents of the appellant some days after the marriage. They, however, informed him that she would be healthy in a few days time as they were getting her medically treated. The appellant, it was alleged, used to live in the society of the respondent husband for two or three days and thereafter she used to leave her matrimonial home and not return for many days. At times, she returned after a month. As and when the respondent -husband asked the parents of the appellant, they informed him that medical treatment was going on and they would send her in a few days. In this manner, it is alleged that the appellant remained in the society of the respondent - husband for about three months during their entire period of marriage. It is also alleged that the parents of the appellant instigated her to demand land from her father -in -law. She also pressurized the respondent to live separately from his parents. The respondent, however, refused to accede to her such demands. On this, she got aggressive. Brother of the appellant, namely, Harjeet came to the matrimonial home of the parties about one and a half years earlier to the filing of the petition and he took the appellant with him. Therefore, the respondent husband filed a petition in terms of Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking restitution of conjugal rights, which as already noticed has been allowed.

(3.) NOTICE of the petition filed by the respondent was issued to the appellant by the learned trial Court. The appellant appeared in Court but failed to file reply within the stipulated period. Accordingly, her defence was struck off vide order dated 08.10.2013.