JOGINDRA KAUR Vs. SHIVCHARAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against a decree for restitution of conjugal rights passed against the appellant by the district fudge Jammu under S. 9 of the Hindi Carriage Act by his order dated 2 -6 -64.

(2.) THE respondent brought the petition against the appellant stating that the parties were married in village Dablehar Tehsil R. S. Pura in the year 1956. In 1957 the father of the appellant took her away from the house of the respondent and subsequently did not like to send her back but on the persuasion of the respondent brought the appellant back to his house in the year 1958 where she remained for two or three months. The brothers of the appellant took her away from the respondents house without his consent. Later on in spite of efforts on the part of the respondent and his father, the appellant did not return. Hence the petition.

(3.) THE wife appellant in her written statement stated that she was and is always prepared to live with the respondent but the trouble according to her had started in the Assembly elections of 1957 when the father of the respondent stood as a candidate from the R. S. Pura constituency. The father of the appellant opposed the father of the respondent and supported a National Conference candidate who succeeded as against the respondents father. This embittered the relations between the family of the respondent and that of the appellants father. Thereafter the appellant was maltreated and abused by the respondent and his parents arid was turned out of the house more than once. Later on the respondent was transferred to Doda. The father of the appellant took her to Doda where the respondent was stationed. Just after a few days of her going there the mother of the respondent came to that place and hardly allowed the appellant to remain with her husband for three months. The husband under the pressure of his mother took the appellant away from Doda and left her on the roadside at R. S. Pura. Despite all entreaties on the part of the wife and her parents, the respondent did not at all allow the appellant to remain with him and consequently deserted her.