The term 'reasonable excuse' as used in sub section (1) of section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, No. XXV of 1955, does not include a ground which is not one of the grounds mentioned in Sub-section (2).

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the wife from the order of the District Judge dated 10-101960 allowing the husband's prayer under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights upon her refusal, without reasonable excuse, to go with him to Bombay, where he is employed as a mechanic and her insistence, in spite of her husband's wishes, of staying at Indore in the house of an aunt, who has been for a long time in loco maternis to her. Though the case has been argued at great length, and almost the entire body of Indian and English Case law on this question has been canvassed, the problems that, arise are comparatively simple and can be formulated thus :

(i) Whether the husband has been guilty of cruelty which would entitle the wife to seek judicial separation. Instances alleged by the wife and substantially disbelieved by the lower Court are : (a) that the husband once pushed her while she was pregnant which "necessitated medical treatment and endangered her life, (b) that he took away a child aged six weeks without regard to the mother's feelings and thereby caused her considerable mental pain, (c) that on more than one occasion in the past he beat her with a view to relieving her of her ornaments so that he could sell them and spend the money on himself. (ii) Whether the Court can be invited to look into factual allegations that, not being ones properly under Section 9 (2), can still be reasonable excuse for withdrawing from the society of the aggrieved spouse in this case the husband. The grievances under this heading are enlisted : (a) the husband's failure to provide for the wife for a long period; (b) his inability to earn sufficient money for supporting himself, the wife and two children; (c) his getting into difficulties with his employer at Bombay in 1956 which necessitated his making good a loss of 350/- by borrowing the amount on a pronote from the wife's aunt; (d) his general undesirability of character, in the words of the wife, "love for money without any love for the wife or children. " (e) as alleged in the appellate court his having sold away his agricultural land.

(iii) Whether in spite of the appearances the real position is that the husband has deserted the wife because he is unwilling to stay at "the matrimonial Home'' established by the couple at the house of the wife's aunt, Saraswatibai at 24, Ada Bazar Indore. (iv) Whether even in the event of this appellate Court upholding the order granting the restitution of conjugal rights, it should put certain conditions in effect assuring the wife that she would get the same quality of comfort and provision at Bombay as she has been getting at Indore from the aunt who is prepared to look after her and has already created, or is planning to create, a trust in her favour with an annuity paid out from the income.

( 2 ) THE broad facts are as follows. The husband who was about 35 years at the time of his application in 1959, is the son of a cultivator having some land and a house in a village a few miles outside, Indore. He was married in 1946 when, he was about 22 years, and was expecting to become nothing better than mechanic. He had an aunt in Sushilabai Chagan a relation by marriage of the ruling princely house. On the other side, the wife, about 12 years of age at that time, was of a humble parentage, but she had virtually been adopted by her aunt, Saraswatibai holkar, the childless wife of a near relation of the same ruling house. The two aunts, who at that time seem to have been on terms of friendship with their houses within about 3 or 4 furlongs in the town of Indore, decided that the two should be married, the only thing to recommend the husband in the eyes of the wife's aunt in the position of her mother being that "he was a presentable young man. " Whether or not the Holkar aunt had thought of providing for the wife, she never investigated into his earning capacity, and ability to provide. for her adopted daughter, on the lin