A wife cannot be compelled to live with her husband's parents if she has been subjected to cruelty and desertion by them.

J.N. BHAT:- 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.

(4) The trial Court of the District Judge Jammu framed the following two issues in the case:

1. Whether the non-applicant has withdrawn from the society of the applicant without any reasonable excuse? OFF

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to any relief in this case? OPP

(5) A number of witnesses was produced on either side. The respondent produced Nidhan Singh, Sardar Singh, Charanjit Singh, Sunder Singh and Suchet Singh as witnesses. The appellant produced Bhola Singh, Bagh Singh, and Maghar Singh as witnesses and herself went into the witness box.

(6) The learned Judge has given in detail the statements of the witnesses produced on either side. After taking into consideration the evidence of the parties, he has come to the conclusion that the appellant desired the respondent to separate himself from his parents but the respondent cannot be compelled to do so. He has further held:

from the evidence on record I feel that the relations between the parents of the parties of the case have been strained after the election of the year 1957 in which the father of the petitioner was defeated. The result was that the respondent was not now willing to live-with the petitioner in his house jointly with his parents.

The learned Judge reiterates :

The mere fact that the petitioner was not willing to separate himself from the joint family cannot be a reasonable excuse for the respondent in order to refuse to return to the house of the petitioner.

(7) These are the findings of the learned District Judge. We might straightaway say that the story set up by the respondent in his petition is not at all borne out from his evidence. The brief statement of facts as given by him and as reproduced in the opening part of the judgment of the learned District Judge is not only untrue but is a completely distorted version of the case of the parties. The witnesses produced by the respond

Click Here to Read the rest of this document