IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, EAST

DISTRICT, VISHWAS NAGAR, DELHI,

H.M.A. PETITION NO. 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:-

Sh. Pyarelal
S/o Sh. Chiranjeelal,
R/o 1/201, Trilok Puri,
New Delhi-110091 Petitioner

Versus

Smt. Meenu
W/o Sh. Pyarelal,
D/o Sh. Premchand,
R/o Gali No.10, Makan No.12,
Sai Nagar, Meethapur,
New Delhi-110044 Respondent

PETITION FOR RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS UNDER

SECTION 9 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Petitioner was married to the Respondent on

07.03.2011 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at Gali

No.10, Makan No.12, Sai Nagar, Meethapur, New Delhi-

110044. A true copy of the card of the marriage as solemnized

 between the Petitioner and the Respondent is annexed and

marked herewith as ANNEXURE A-1.

2. That marriage between parties was consummated and out of

this wedlock, one girl child named Baby Ishita was born on

08.03.2014 at Trilok Puri, New Delhi.

3. That in reply to para 3 it is stated that Respondent and his

family belong to middle class and have deep roots in society

and are very ethical people. The Respondent and his family are

totally against and do not believe in giving and/or taking of

dowry, and thus they had requested the family of Petitioner to

have a simple ceremony of marriage and no dowry should

either be offered or given to the Respondent or his family

members and relatives. Thus huge expenditures on dowry

articles, stridhan or welcome of barat is incurred at the behest

of Petitoner and her family alone.

4. That it is further submitted that as the Respondent and his

family dont believe in dowry and as they have never asked the

Petitioner or her family for any dowry, thus there is no

question of being unhappy with dowry articles given in

marriage. The allegations as to abusing the Petitioner under

 influence of liquor or daily harassing or torturing her for

1,00,000/- and one motor cycle by Respondent and his father

are denied.

5. That in reply to allegations in para 4 as to Respondent No.1

beating the Petitioner with belt on 17/05/2011 and as to

suspecting her character and keeping her locked in a room etc

are specifically denied as being untrue. It is submitted that

after marriage, the family of Respondent No.1 gave Petitioner

as much love and respect as they give to their own daughter.

6. That it is also submitted that the Respondent No.1 has utmost

love, care and respect for Petitioner and there was never any

incidence of any type of physical or verbal abuse of Petitioner

by the Respondent No1.

7. That in reply to para 5 it is stated the on 08.03.2014, one

female child namely Ishita was born to Respondent No.1 and

Petitioner. It is submitted that Respondent No.1 or his family

never had any issue as to the gender of the child. The

Respondent No1 and his family love and care for the child in

same way as they would have loved a male child.

8. That in reply to para 6 it is submitted that all the allegations

as to consumption of liquor and gambling are denied as being

false and malicious.

9. That in reply to para 7 and 8 it is submitted that the

allegations as to demand for dowry and physical abuse by

Respondent No1 are denied above. The allegation of

Respondent No.1 stealing Petitioners earring (jhumki) is false

and baseless.

That it is further submitted that in August, 2014 the Petitioner

went to visit her parents home on the occasion of

Rakshabandhan along with Respondent No1 and their

daughter. However, without any reason and to utter surprise

of Respondent No1, the Petitioner refused to return to her

matrimonial house with Respondent No1.

That the Respondent No.1 repeatedly requested the Petitioner

to come along with him at live at their matrimonial house. The

Respondent No1 also said that their daughter needs both of

them and they are both responsible for the upbringing of their

daughter. Despite this the Petitioner without, giving any

reasonable justification, declined to return and decided

instead to live at her parents house with their daughter.

That after multiple attempts to convince the Petitioner to

return to her matrimonial home, the Petitioner agreed to go

back to their Matrimonial house in March 2016.

That it is further submitted that after returning from her

parents home the Petitioner was still under the influence of

her Parents as her mother used to call her daily and tutor her

that she should come to their house with her daughter and

live with them. It is also submitted that though the Petitioner

performed all conjugal obligations accordingly but her

behavior towards the Respondent No1 and his family was very

harsh and abusive which resultantly inflicted mental torture

and agony upon Respondent No 1 and his family members.

That it is further submitted that Petitioners mother use to

threaten Respondent No 1 that they will file false and frivolous

cases against Respondent No1 and his family along with it the

Petitioner used to taunt Respondent No1 on difference in their

educational qualification and used to mock him by saying that

she is more qualified than the Respondent No1 and thus she

deserves someone better than Respondent No1.

That is submitted that the allegation that the Respondent No1

picked up his minor daughter from the bed to throw her on the

floor but was saved by the Petitioner is false and baseless. It is

submitted that Respondent No1 loves and cares for his

daughter a lot and he constantly keeps pleading with

Petitioner that it is their responsibility to bring her up together

and with utmost love and care.

That in reply to para 10 it is stated that all the articles and

stridhan of Petitioner are in possession of Petitoner as on

25.08.2016 the Petitioner again left the house of Respondent

No1 along with their daughter on the occasion of

janamashtami to visit her parents. It is submitted that the

Petitioner did not return to her matrimonial house and despite

multiple requests denied to stay with Respondent No1. The

Respondent No.1 further noted that this time the Petitioner

had taken along with her all her gold ornaments, clothes and

other belongings on the pretext of a wedding in her relatives

house.
 That in reply to para 11 it is stated that all complaints of

domestic violence against the Respondent No1 are false and

motivated and hence denied.

That it response to para 12 it is submitted that Respondent

No1 has his own work of furniture and belongs to middle class

family. The respondent No1 has limited means of income and

even his source of income is not stable.That the Petitioner

used to fulfill all the demands of the Respondent with respect

to food, clothes and other basic necessities. It is further

submitted that though the Petitioner has limited income and

his source of income is also not stable then also for the love

and affection that the Petitioner has for the Respondent, he

used to go out of the way to fulfill the same.

10. That the Respondent was well aware before the marriage that

the mother of the Petitioner passed away and therefore, there

is no one to take care of the household. The Petitioner and his

family requested the Respondent only to take care of the

household after marriage. However she never took any interest

in any daily chores of the household. It is submitted that

whenever any relative of the Petitioner came to their house,

 the Respondent used to avoid them and took no interest to

welcome them or to attend them.

11. That in August, 2014 the Respondent went to visit her

parents house on the occasion of Rakshabandhan along with

the Petitioner and their daughter to celebrate the said occasion

at her parents house. However, without any reason and to the

utter surprise of the Petitioner, the Respondent refused to

return to her matrimonial house with the Petitioner.

12. That the Petitioner called his wife and asked her as to when

will she return from her parents house to her matrimonial

house but the Respondent refused to return to the Petitioner.

13. The Petitioner was completely surprised and shocked by such

behaviour of the Respondent. He repeatedly requested the

Respondent to come along with him at their matrimonial

house however, without giving any reasonable reason to the

Petitioner, the Respondent declined to return back to her

matrimonial house and decided instead to live at her parents

house with their daughter.

14. That the Petitioner tried to convince the Respondent to come

back and also said that their daughter need both of them and
 they both are responsible for the upbringing of their daughter,

despite that, the Respondent refused to come with the

Petitioner.

15. That in March, 2016, the Petitioner visited the Respondent at

her parents house and made several attempts to convince the

Respondent to go back to their matrimonial house with the

Petitioner. After repeated requests, the Respondent agreed to

go back to their matrimonial house and went with the

Petitioner.

16. That the mother of the Respondent used to call her daily and

tutor her that she should come to their house with her

daughter and live with them. The family members of the

Respondent always used abusing language with the Petitioner

and taunted and quarreled with him on one pretext or the

other.

17. That the Respondent performed all conjugal obligations

accordingly but it is submitted that the Respondents

behaviour towards the Petitioner and his family was very

harsh, abusive which resultantly inflicted mental torture &

agony upon the Petitioner and his family members. It is

 further submitted that the Petitioner kept on enquiring the

Respondent as to the cause of her behaviour towards the

Petitioner so that he could resolve the same amicably. However

the Respondent never used to share with the Petitioner the

reason for her behaviour.

18. That the mother of the Respondent used to threaten the

Petitioner that they will file so many false and frivolous cases

against the Petitioner and his family. The Petitioner was

shocked and was not able to understand the reason behind

such nature of the Respondent and kept on asking the

Respondent to share the same with him so that he could try to

resolve the same. However the Respondent never disclosed the

reason to him and rather misbehaved and abused him.

19. The Petitioner bestowed the Respondent with the utmost love

and care yet the Respondent, without any reason and on

instigation of her mother, used to treat the Petitioner and his

family members rudely and badly.

20. The Respondent also used to taunt the Petitioner on the

differences in their educational qualification and used to mock

 him by saying that she is more qualified than the Petitioner

and therefore she deserved someone better than the Petitioner.

21. That inspite of all these practices the Petitioner and his other

family members tolerated such a behavior of the Petitioner and

loved her, maintained her properly and provided her

everything of necessity.

22. That on 25.08.2016 the Respondent again left the house of the

Petitioner along with the daughter on the occasion of

Janamashtami saying that she wanted to visit her parents and

promised that she would return the next day. It is submitted

that the Respondent did not return the next day to her

matrimonial house despite of Petitioners repeated request to

come back and denied to stay with him. The Petitioner further

noted that this time the Respondent had taken along with her

all her gold ornaments, clothes and other belongings on

pretext of a wedding in her relatives house but she did not

come back besides of all efforts of the Petitioner, family

members and well-wishers but all in vain.

23. That the Petitioner has made several efforts to join the

company of the Respondent but the family of the Respondent

 abstained the Petitioner from even talking to the Respondent

or to their daughter, Ishita on one pretext to other.

24. That the father of the Petitioner also made several calls to the

father of the Respondent and requested him that he should

persuade his daughter to return to her matrimonial house and

live with her husband for the benefit and well-being of their

daughter, Ishita, however the father of the Respondent

blatantly and curtly refused to accept to his requests.

25. That the Respondent by living away from the Petitioner is

depriving their daughter from the love, care and affection of

the father which is the utmost requirement for the child of

such tender age. It is further submitted that whenever the

Petitioner took any initiative to have a conversation with the

Respondent about their daughter Ishita, it was always met

with a negative response or unreasonable anger.

26. That the Respondent, because of the reasons best known to

her and under the opinion and counselling of her family

members, is depriving their daughter, Ishita who is three years

old from the love and affection of her father, the Petitioner
 herein, though the company and guidance of the father is of

utmost importance for the growth of the child.

27. That the obstinacy of the Respondent has gone to such an

extent that she is not allowing the child to meet her own father

and other members of the family. That the Petitioner has not

seen her daughter, Ishita since 25.08.2016 as the Respondent

has stopped bringing her to Petitioners house nor is she

allowing the Petitioner to meet his only daughter.

28. That since the Petitioner is not able to take care of her

daughter on a daily basis therefore, the Petitioner does not

know about the well being of his daughter, or whether she is

being provided proper nourishment by the Respondent or

about her physical and personal development, and therefore,

the Petitioner is under constant fear that the unpredictable

and obstinate behaviour of the Respondent will lead to further

deterioration of their childs well being and development and

will have an impact on the future of the child, who is of such

tender age.

29. That before filing the said petition the Petitioner has already

made several calls and also visited the parental house of the
 Respondent to sort out the issues between them through the

parents of the Respondent, but to the utter shock and surprise

for the Petitioner, the parents of the Respondent did not heard

the request of the Petitioner and asked him to return without

the Respondent and their daughter.

30. That the Petitioner is left with no other alternative remedy

except to approach this Honble court after the Respondent

without giving any reasonable excuse has withdrawn from the

society of the Petitioner since 25.08.2016, although the

Petitioner still wants to reside with the Respondent for the love

and affection he has for the Respondent and for his daughter,

Ishita.

31. That the Petitioner is ready to live with the Respondent as

husband without any condition and is also willing to perform

all the rights and duties of matrimonial obligations.

32. That the present Petition is not presented in collusion with the

Respondent.

33. That there is no other ground why relief prayed for should not

be granted.
34. That there is no unnecessary or improper delay in filling the

present Petition.

35. That there is no cohabitation between the parties since August

2016 and hence the present Petition.

36.

37. That the cause of action arose when the Respondent left the

company of the Petitioner without any reason, consent and

permission of the Petitioner. It further arose when the

Respondent was not willing to return to her matrimonial

house even after receiving number of calls and personal visits

at her parental house from the Petitioner and his family

members. It further arose and is continuing, since August,

2016 as there is no cohabitation between the parties and the

Respondent has failed to perform the matrimonial duties and

as such the cause of action is day to day occurring and

subsisting.

38. That the cause of action accrued to the Petitioner against the

Respondent, within the jurisdiction of this Honble Court on

25.08.2016 when the Respondent left for her parental house

along with their daughter at Meethapur, New Delhi and it

 continues to accrue from day to day till the Respondent comes

back to the home of the Petitioner and resumes his company.

39. That the appropriate court fee has been affixed.

PRAYER

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present

case, it is most respectfully prayed that this Honble Court may

kindly be pleased to:

a. pass a decree for the restitution of conjugal rights be passed in

favour of the petitioner against the respondent;

b. any other relief, which this Honble court deems fit and proper,

be passed in favour of the Petitioner and against the

Respondent.

PETITIONER

Through Advocate
Place: Delhi
Dated: