The court's decision highlights the importance of considering the conduct of both parties in determining whether there is a reasonable excuse for withdrawal from the society of the husband. It also emphasizes the need for effective conciliation machinery and family courts in matrimonial matters to assist in resolving disputes and promoting reconciliation.

Rajindra Sachar, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against the dismissal of husband s application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution brought by him. The parties were married on 30 April, 1967. The first male child was born on 1. 2. 1969. His name is Banti. The second male child was born on 22. 11. 1974. Ear]ieronl2thnovember,1974 the application under Section (9) of the Act has been brought by the appellant husband alleging that the respondent wife had left the matrimonial home without any justification and he is seeking the restitution.

( 2 ) THE wife had denied that she was keeping away without any reasonable excuse. It was pleaded that she was treated cruelly and that he used to give her beating. The Trial Court by the impugned order found that the wife was justified in withdrawing from the husband s society and dismissed the application. The husband being aggrieved has come up in this court in appeal. It is common case that the wife left the matrimonial home on 24. 6. 1974 and is living in Kapurthala with her parents family. Of course, there is a serious dispute as to the. circumstances and the reasons why she left. It appears that after marriage the husband who belongs to Delhi joined with the brothers of the wife in a business venture at Kapurthala. The appellant then shifted to Kapurthala, within about 9-10 months of the marriage i. e. sometime in the end of 1968. But after some time this business failed and he alleges that he came back from Kapurthala and the wife went subsequently for her first delivery according to the customs. To start with, the appellant and the respondent lived with the family at Lajpat Nagar, then to Church Lane and then according to the appellant at the instance of the respondent he took a separate house in Krishan Nagar. He thus denied having given any beating to her. The respondent s case as put up by her in evidence is that ever since the marriage the husband was treating her cruelly and used to beat her and even suspected her character and openly told her that she was just one of the women. She states that she stayed in her parents family from 1969 onwards and it is only some time in January/february 1974 that at the intervention of some people she came back with the husband to Delhi and then left Delhi in June, 1974 because there was no improvement in his behaviour. Mr. Sahni the learned counsel for the appellant challenged the finding of the Trial Court as to the reasonableness of the excuse for the- wife withdrawing from the husband s society. It is contended that there was no proof of any cruelty or misbehaviour justifying the withdrawal by the wife. In the written statement the plea taken was one of justification by the: wife by saying that the behaviour of the husband was both cruel and indifferent towards her and that the appellant also used to run away from the. parents to unknown places and this attitude remained unchanged and indifferent even after January/february, 1974 when she came back from Kapurthala. The first criticism. by Mr. Sahni was that according to the: respondent she had allegedly remained continuously in Kapurthala from 1968 onwards till January, 1974 when she was forced to go back from Delhi to Kapurthala in June, 1974. My attention has been drawn to number of letters to show that the respondent with her children were in Delhi during this period. These letters which have been referred are for the period 1973-74. They do suggest that the respondent was, though for some time at Kapurthala but also certainly for sometime at Delhi. Thus EX. Public Witness. 3/7 dated 30. 4. 1978 a letter written by the brother of the respondent to the father of the appellant mentions about the appellant and the respondent and Banti having reached Kapurthala which apparently does show that they had all come together from Delhi. The letter Ex. Public Witness. 3/6 dated 29th December, 1973 written from Kapurthala by the father of the respondent also indicates that the respo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document