Smt. Ramya @ Ragini vs Sri Venkatesh

K.L. Manjunath, J.—The appellant is questioning the legality and correctness of the judgment and decree passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Ramanagara in MC No. 63/2011 dated 29.9.2012 wherein the petition filed u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been allowed by directing the appellant herein to join the respondent and resume the conjugal life. The admitted facts are as hereunder:

The appellant herein is the wife of the respondent. Their marriage was solemnized in accordance with Hindu rites and customs. In the marriage, the appellant has given birth to a son. She was sent to Mysore for her parents'' house when she was in her family way. After delivery, she did not return to her matrimonial home inspite of several requests by her husband.

It is the case of the respondent herein that on 14.9.2010, the parents of the appellant visited the respondent''s village and took away all the belongings of their daughter. In the month of December 2010, a Panchayat was convened in the house of parents of the appellant. In the panchayat, a demand was made by the appellant to set up a separate house in Harohalli, for which, the respondent refused as he had to look after his aged mother. Thereafter, the respondent filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. The appellant filed the written statement. She has denied that she has deserted her husband and contended that she is willing to join him and lead a happy marital life and hence, she-requested for dismissal of the petition.

The petitioner/husband got himself examined as PW-1 and he has relied upon 4 exhibits. PW-1 was not cross examined. The respondent/wife has not stepped into witness box.

In the circumstances, the Trial Court appreciating the evidence let in by the parties allowed the petition by directing the appellant to join the respondent and to resume conjugal life. This order is called in question by the respondent in this appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant/wife is willing to join respondent/husband provided he sets up a separate house leaving his parents. Admittedly, the respondent is residing in a village in Kanakapura. According to the appellant, she is demanding a separate house to be set up in Harohalli Hobli. It is her contention that respondent was not allowing her to live with his parents. When the respondent is the only son and if he is having an aged mother, it would be improper for any Court to direct him to set up a separate house discarding his aged mother without any valid reasons. Therefore, we do no see any merit in the appeal.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed.