and

decree

dated

1.7.2011

passed

in

M.C.No.63/2009 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge and

JMFC, K.G.F., allowing the petition filed u/s 9 of Hindu

Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights.

Miscellaneous First Appeal No.111/2017 is filed under

Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, against the judgment

and decree dated 26.09.2016 passed in M.C.No.66/2011 on

the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Principal JMFC, K.G.F.,

dismissing the petition filed u/s 13(1) (ia) (ib) of Hindu

Marriage Act.

These appeals coming on for final hearing, this day,

VISHWAJITH SHETTY J., delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

1.

These two appeals are filed by the wife challenging the

judgment and decree passed by the Court of Senior Civil

3

Judge & JMFC, K.G.F., in M.C.No.63/2009 dated 01.07.2011

and M.C.No.66/2011 dated 26.09.2016.

2.

Since the parties to the appeals are common and the

dispute between the parties being interlinked, both the

appeals are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this

common judgment.

3.

Brief facts of the case that would be relevant for the

purpose of disposal of these two appeals are that the

marriage of the appellant-wife was solemnized with the

respondent-husband on 15.12.2005 as per the Hindu rites

and customs in the office of the Sub-Registrar, K.G.F. From

the wedlock, the couple have a son who was born on

12.04.2009. It appears that after the birth of the child, the

relationship between the parties had strained and the wife

started residing in her parents house along with her son.

4.

The husband had filed the petition under Section 9 of

the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, 8the Act9) in

M.C.No.63/2009 before the Family Court, alleging that his

wife had left his company on 16.04.2009 without there being

4

any valid reasons and ever since then, she has been residing

in her parents house and inspite of best efforts made by him

to bring her back along with the child, she had refused to join

him. He had also contended that the wife had failed to fulfill

her marital obligations inspite of he providing her all the basic

facilities in the matrimonial house.

5.

The respondent-wife had entered appearance in the

said proceedings and had filed statement of objections,

wherein she had admitted the relationship between the

parties, but had disputed the allegations made against her. It

was contended by her that the husband had ill-treated her

and was demanding dowry and in the month of April 2007, an

attempt was made to kill her by pouring kerosene oil and

setting her on fire. She had also stated that in this regard, a

police complaint was lodged and a criminal case was

registered against her husband. She, therefore, contended

that she had valid reasons to leave the company of her

husband.

6.

During the course of trial, in order to substantiate his

case, the husband had examined himself as PW-1 and got

5

marked seven documents as Exs.P-1 to P-7. On the other

hand, the wife had examined herself as RW-1 and got marked

three documents as Exs.R-1 to R-3 in support of her case.

The Family Court, after appreciating the evidence on record,

by its judgment and decree dated 01.07.2011, allowed the

petition filed by the husband under Section 9 of the Act

seeking restitution of conjugal rights.

7.

After the disposal of the petition filed by the husband

under Section 9 of the Act, the wife filed M.C.No.66/2011 on

15.07.2011 under Section 13(1)(i)(ia)(ib) read with Section

25 of the Act seeking dissolution of marriage. In the said

petition, the wife had contended that the mother of her

husband Smt. Padmavathi and her sister Smt. Umavathi had

proposed the marriage and they had assured that they will

not demand for dowry or marriage expenses as the husband

was a divorcee. However, at the time of marriage, the

husband and his family members demanded money for

printing invitation card and to bare 50% of marriage

expenses and to give jewels and house hold utensils and

Rs.10,000/- cash for stitching suit, and the said demands

6