SMT. RAJINDER KAUR Vs. GHANISHAM DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a wife's appeal against the decree for dissolution of marriage granted by the learned Subordinate Judge Ist Class, Dasuya, exercising the power of the District Judge under the Hindu Marriage Act. The husband had earlier obtained a decree for restitution of conjugal rights on April 30, 1969. He filed the present application for the grant of decree for divorce on 6th May, 1971 on the ground that there had been to resumption of cohabitation since the passing of the decree for restitution of conjugal right?. In this appeal by the wife Shri Sarin, Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that the husband admitted in his evidence that he did Dot file any application for the execution of the decree for restitution of conjugal rights obtained by him and that he was not prepared to take his wife back. He also invited my attention to the statement of the wife that she was prepared to join the husband. He argued that the husband was, therefore, in the wrong and he could not be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong. I do not agree with him. Having obtained a decree for restitution of conjugal rights, it was not necessary for him to file an application for execution of the decree before seeking dissolution of marriage under section 13 of the Act. That be was no longer prepared to take his wife back at the time he gave evidence in Court did not disentitle him from obtaining a decree for divorce. Having baited for two years after the decree for restitution of conjugal rights he was certainly entitled to say that he was not prepared to take his wife back thereafter, the appeal, is, therefore, dismissed. No costs.