JUDGMENT

Vinod Diwakar, J.—Heard Shri Ram Kishore Pandey, learned counsel for the defendant/appellant and Shri Ghanshyam Dwivedi, learned counsel for the plaintiff/respondent no.1.

2. Before we advert to the question of law raised in the instant first appeal by Smt. Garima Singh-the second wife, it would be convenient to have a bird’s eye view of the facts of the case.

3. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that on 06.05.2002, Smt. Pratima Singh married Raghvendra Singh in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies. Owing to certain matrimonial disputes, Raghvendra Singh filed a Matrimonial Case No.24 of 2012 titled as Raghvendra Singh Vs. Smt. Pratima Singh under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, before the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Chitrakoot, for dissolution of marriage. In the aforesaid matrimonial case, Smt Pratima Singh filed a counterclaim under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for restitution of conjugal rites. The Matrimonial Case No.24 was rejected, and the counterclaim filed by Smt. Pratima Singh was allowed with the direction to Raghvendra Singh to bring Smt. Pratima Singh to his house within one month from the date of order to perfor