Back
LISA GILL, RITU TAGORE
Manjot Singh – Appellant
Versus
Rajpreet Kaur – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Lisa Gill, J. (Oral)
Appellant-husband has filed this appeal, challenging interim order dated 10.02.2022, passed by the learned Family Court, Sirsa.
2. Appellant-husband filed a petition under section 9 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 (for short 'the Act'), seeking restitution of conjugal rights. It is pleaded that marriage of the appellant and respondent was solemnized on 23.02.2019 at Gidderbaha, in a simple manner. One son was born out of this wedlock on 09.04.2020 at Bathinda. It is further stated that the respondent is serving CRPF as a Constable and at the time of marriage was posted at Gandhi Nagar (Gujarat). She was thereafter posted at Delhi. The appellant claimed that he also resided with the respondent at Delhi for about two (02) months, but her behaviour was not correct and proper. Respondent has been described as a quarrelsome lady, harassing the appellant without any cause at the instigation of her parents and family members, refusing to prepare meals and do other domestic works; besides, leaving the matrimonial home without permission of the appellant.
3. Shorn of unnecessary details, appellant claimed that respondent-wife had left the matrimonial home on 14
The burden of proof in restitution of conjugal rights lies with the withdrawing spouse to show reasonable cause for separation; the court affirms joint responsibility in marriage.
Restitution decree under Section 9 HMA denied as wife failed to prove husband's withdrawal without reasonable excuse; acquittal in cruelty case and unreliable evidence establish justification.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in a matrimonial dispute, the party claiming restitution of conjugal rights must prove that the other party left without reasonable cause, and....
The court affirmed the Family Court's dismissal of the restitution petition, ruling that the respondent had reasonable cause to withdraw from the appellant, emphasizing the necessity of pleadings in ....
The statutory provision allows for divorce if no restitution of conjugal rights occurs for over a year post-decree, validating the grounds for divorce.
The court clarified that ex parte proceedings can be set aside to ensure both parties are heard, but maintenance orders under Section 24 cannot be challenged through Order IX, Rule 7 CPC.
The appeal for Restitution of Conjugal Rights was dismissed due to the husband's failure to demonstrate genuine efforts to maintain marital relationships and care for his wife and child.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
