( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act from a decree for restitution of conjugal rights passed in favour of the husband.

( 2 ) IN his petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. Pannalal alleged that he was married to Tulsa in or about 1953. She gave birth to a daughter in 1957, but the girl did not survive for more than two days. Tulsa's father took her to his house for Diwali festival but thereafter she did not return.

( 3 ) TULSA resisted the petition on the ground that in fact the plaintiff deserted her and he treated, her with cruelty.

( 4 ) THE learned Additional District Judge Gwalior, who tried the petition found that the plaintiff did not desert her nor did he treat her with cruelty. In the result he passed a decree in favour of the husband.

( 5 ) SHRI Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellant, invites our attention to pannalal's stater ment. There he says that one day she requested him to escort her to her father's house and gave him to understand that she would return, with, him in the evening on the same day. He, therefore, left her at her father's house in the morning, but when he went the second time, in the eve