G.C. Mittal, J. - (1.) Chander Parkash and Shashi were married at Karnal on 12th Oct., 1980. Roth belong to Karnal, and were living in the nearby lanes. On 25th March, 1981 the husband filed a petition under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to clam restitution of conjugal rights, on the pleas that they lived together upto 26th Dec., 1980 and he provided her with comforts and all necessities of living, which were within his means but on 27th Dec., 1980 when he was away to his office, (husband was a clerk in the Food Corporation of India), she of her own left his house and took away all the valuable clothes and ornaments, which were given to her by him and her parents. Same evening he went to bring her back but she refused. Thereafter, on the Lohri day i.e. 12.1.1981 he took various respectables alongwith him and went to bring her back but the wife refused to come back and her parents also refused to send her. On these pleas it was stated that she had left the house without any reasonable excuse and claimed restitution.
(2.) The wife contested the petition and pleaded that the parties lived happily only for a few days after marriage and then the husband at the instance of his relations started taunting her about the meagre dowry given by her parents and further demands were raised by him. According to her written statement her parents had given dowry beyond their means and same inspite of limited resources, of his demands were met but when there was no end to the demands and they were not met, the husband started maltreating her and at several times gave her merciless beating and turned her out of the house. With the intervention of the relations of the respectables, she came back to her husband's house and again the same old demands were repeated and on her refusal to coerce her parents again and again, she was treated badly and was tortured by not giving her food and by using all sorts of coercive methods. On 27th Dec., 1980 she given merciless beating and was turned out of the house by her husband in wearing clothes with threat that if she tries to enter the house, she will do so at the cost of her life. She further pleaded that several efforts were made by her father and other relations and the members of the brotherhood to request the husband to keep her but he refused. Accordingly, it was pleaded that her husband was guilty of cruelty who had turned her out and it was wrong that she had deserted him.
(3.) On the contest of the parties, the following issues were framed 1. Whether the respondent had deserted the petitioner without reasonable excuse as alleged in the petition ? 2. Whether the petitioner has treated the respondent with cruelty as alleged in the written statement ? If so to what effect ? 3. Relief.;