SURJIT KAUR Vs. GURJANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Mansa, dated June 14, 1978, whereby the petition of the respondent under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights against his wife was decreed.

(2.) The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnised on June 23, 1967. They lived together as husband and wife for some time. A female child was born out of the wedlock, but unfortunately she died about three weeks after the birth. Thereafter no child was born. According to the respondent, the appellant after living as a wife for about eight or nine years, left his house about two and a half years before the filing of the petition without any excuse or his consent. A number of efforts were made to bring her back through Panchayat, but to no success. According to the appellant she was turned out by her husband, the respondent, after beating her and keeping her starved under the influence of his brother's wife. It was also alleged that the respondent had the intention to go in for another marriage. In evidence a number of witnesses were produced on both sides. Their depositions were generally to the affect that Panchayat bad gone from one side to the other to bring about reconciliation. According to the findings of the trial Court, the appellant had not been able to justify her withdrawal from the society of her husband Hence the decree for restitution of conjugal rights was passed.

(3.) I have perused the evidence on both sides closely. Though the appellant had pleaded in her written statement that she had been subjected to beating and was even kept starved by the respondent, yet these allegations were not even proved from the statement of the appellant herself. According to her deposition she had lived with her husband peacefully and happily for a period of 8 years after the marriage and it was only about one and a half years prior to the petition that she was forcibly turned out. According to her, she had submitted an application to the Panchayat and another application to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhatinda, pertaining to the mal-treatment meted out to her by her husband. However, neither these applications were got produced, nor were their copies brought on the record, nor was any evidence adduced to prove this fact. Besides, question was put to the respondent in cross- examination regarding the allegations of the appellant having subjected her to beating or having kept her starved. Even her brother, Lillu Singh R. W. 3, did not lend support in this regard. Kartar Singh, R. W. 5, who claimed to he a go between who had brought about the marriage between the parties and was related to the appellant, also did not corroborate the allegation that the appellant was meted out maltreatment under the influence of the respondent's brother's wife in his presence. The trial Subordinate Judge after assessing the evidence on the record, came to the firm conclusion that there was no reasonable ground for the appellant to withdraw from the society of the respondent. It was also held that the allegation that the respondent was misbehaving towards the appellant under the influence of his brother's wife or that he wanted to remarry her younger sister, was unfounded. These conclusions are based on correct assessment of the evidence The learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to lay his hands on any satisfactory evidence which may warrant the setting aside of these conclusions.