( 1 ) IN assailing the decree for the restitution of conjugal rights granted by the trial Judge under S. 9, Hindu Marriage Act, in favour of the respondent-wife and against the appellant-husband, Mr. Mitra, the learned Counsel for the appellant-husband, has very seriously urged that there was no marriage in fact between the parties to warrant the decree and that, even if there was a marriage in fact, there was no marriage in law as ceremonies essential to constitute a Hindu marriage have not been proved to have been preformed in this case. Having heard the learned Counsel for both the parties at considerable length and having gone through the records ourselves, we are, however, satisfied that a marriage, both in fact and in law, between the parties has been satisfactorily proved to warrant the decree under appeal.

( 2 ) AS to the marriage in fact, the evidence adduced by and on behalf of the petitioner in support of the marriage is good in quality and great in quantity. It is great in quantity because as many as 15 witnesses have been examined on behalf of the petitioner; it is good in quality because a great deal of the evidence has come from persons who