The choice of the matrimonial home is to be determined by the husband and the wife on the basis of common convenience and benefit of the parties.

V. S. DESHPANDE J.

( 1 ) WHEN the husband and the wife are both gainfully employed at two different places from before their marriage, where will be the matrimonial home after the marriage ? With more and more women taking up jobs and wanting to retain them even after their marriage, the question becomes increasingly important, topical and controversial. It has arisen in this case and requires consideration in some depth.

( 2 ) THE wife, Swaraj, was working as a teacher at Sunam, District Sangrur, from 1956 and was the Headmistress of Government High School, when she was examined as a witness in 1969. The parties were married on 12th July, 1964 at Sunam. The husband was abroad for some years and though he seems to be well qualified he did not get a satisfactory job in India. He was employed in M/s. Hastinapur Metals from September, 1966 to September. 1967 at Rs. 500. 00 p. m. without any allowances and from 14th September, 1967 by Master Sathe and Kothari at Rs. 600. 00 p. m. without any other allowances. The father of the wife, a petition writer, lives at Sunam, while the father of the husband, a farmer, lives at village Lehra. The husband has no house in Delhi of his own. Before the marriage or at any time after the marriage the parties did not discuss, much less come to any agreement. as to where their matrimonial home should be after the marriage. Therefore, even after the marriage the wife continued to live at Sunam and the husband at Delhi. The wife come to Delhi to live with her husband from 12th July, 1964 to 28th August. 1964 and then went back to Sunam. She again came to live with the husband from October, 1964 to 1st February, 1965 and went back to Sunam on 2nd February, 1965, but did not return to Delhi thereafter.

( 3 ) THE husband filed a petition for the restitution of conjugal rights against the wife on the ground that she had withdrawn herself from the society of the husband without reasonable excuse within the meaning of section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act- 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The husband complained in the petition that the causes of her estrangement from him appear to he as follows : (a) She felt the separation from her parents keenly and longed to go back to them ; (b) She pressed the husband that the latter s aged father shoud not live with him ; (c) The parents of the wife wanted to live on her income and urged her to return to their home ; (d) That the wife was abusive, short tempered and quarred some; and (c) That the wife imagined that she was not capable of leading a married life and this made her irritable and frigid.

( 4 ) THE wife defended the petition and replied to the grounds on which the petition was based as follows: (a) There was nothing unnatural if she felt lonely for sometime after marriage, but this was not cause for the alleged estrangement. The husband himself had left the wife a! her parents place; (b) The wife never asked the husband that his father should not live with him ; (c) The parents of the wife never wanted to live on her income ; (d) and (e) These grounds were said to false allegations and were denied. The wife further pleaded that it was the husband who treated her badly. All through he was bent upon taking out the maximum amount of money from her and her parents. The husband has already extracted a huge dowry from the parents of the wife and has deprived her of jewellery clothes and other valuable presents which had been given to her by her parents. The husband has kept all this money and has deliberately left the wife without good treatment at home or any proper medical treatment when she was ill and when she was in the family way and delivered a daughter. The reason why she could not join the husband was the cruelty meted out to her by the husband.

( 5 ) THE petition was dismissed by the trial court, but was allowed In appeal by a learned single Judge of this court. Hence this Letters Patent Appeal. Both the trial court and the first appellate

Click Here to Read the rest of this document