A wife is entitled to insist that her husband treat her with dignity and self-respect befitting the status of a wife, and that her life with her husband will be peaceful and happy. The court has a discretion to grant or deny the relief of restitution of conjugal rights, depending on the circumstances of each case, including the conduct of the husband.

JUDGMENT:- O.P. No.99 of 1962 out of which the appeal arises was instituted by the respondent-husband Krishnaswami Achari against the appellant, his wife Kanna alias Mahalakshmi Ammal under S.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The learned Subordinate Judge of Ramanathapuram had decreed restitution; and on appeal the learned District Judge of Ramanathapuram had confirmed the said order. Hence the appeal by the wife.

2. The marriage between the parties took place in the year 1951 and they were both living together amicably in the adjacent houses divided only by a partition wall and the appellant gave birth to two daughters, the last of whom was born in the month of Avani, 1959, in the house of the appellant's parents.

3. The respondent-husband claims that, after the birth of the second child, the appellant did not go back to the respondent's house, as a result of a dispute between her father and the respondent in respect of a partnership business which they were carrying on before. The respondent's attempts to persuade the appellant a number of times from 1959 onwards to come and live with him have failed and the intervention of Saravana Perumal Pillai and two other gentlemen have also proved ineffective. Thereupon the respondent filed O.P.84 of 1960 for restitution of conjugal rights and the appellant in her turn filed a suit for maintenance. The O.P. and the suit were however not pressed in order that the parties might try to find ways and means for settling the difference among themselves; but unfortunately the efforts have proved futile.

4. The respondent has filed the present O.P.99 of 1962 for restitution alleging that the appellant had, on the evil advice of her father, not rejoined him and that she had withdrawn herself from his society, without any reasonable excuse.

5. The application is resisted by the appellant on various grounds. It is alleged that, as a result of the misunderstanding which arose between the respondent and her father in respect of the partnership business, the respondent was ill-treating her and was compelling her to execute ,in his favour a settlement of all the properties which she had obtained from her father, and as she refused, he quarrelled with her frequently and finally drove her out of his house and she apprehended danger to her life if she went back to the respondent. The respondent was also keeping one Ramasubbammal as his concubine and was, besides, addicted to liquor and gambling. Further her state of health was such that she could not have conjugal relationship with the respondent without danger to her life.

6. I may straightway dispose of the plea that the respondent was keeping Ramasubbammal as his concubine and was also addicted to liquor and gambling. It appears to me clear that these contentions are false and have been thought of at this belated stage with a view to reinforce her contention of cruelty.

xx xx xx

xx xx xx

xx xx xx

xx xx xx

7. It is seen that, in spite of her bad health since the birth of the first child, the appellant had cohabited with the respondent and had produced a second child subsequently; and it is not suggested that the delivery of the second child had worsened her physical condition or had endangered her life. It appears to me that the doctor R.W.7 had taken an unnecessarily gloomy picture about the physical condition of the appellant.

8. I shall now refer to the law on the subject. S.9 of the Hindu Marriage Art, 1955 is worded thus:

"9(1). When either the husband or the wife has, without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, the aggrieved party may apply, by petition to the district court, for restitution of conjugal rights and the court, on being satisfied of the truth of the statements made in such petition and that there is no legal ground why the application should not be granted, may decree restitution of conjugal rights accordingly.

(2). Nothing shall be pleaded in answer to a petition for