- (1.) IN pursuant to the notice dated 01.5.2015 Shri Sajjan Singh Rathore has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent Smt. Santosh Devi.
(2.) ADMIT . No need to issue notice afresh as the contesting respondent is represented by his counsel. With consent of the parties, this appeal is heard finally today itself. In brief facts of the case are that the appellant Kanhaiya Dan and the respondent Smt. Santosh Devi entered into a wedlock as per the Hindu customs and rites on 08.5.2002. The respondent Smt. Santosh Devi at the time of marriage was having qualification of 10th standard, whereas the appellant Kanhaiya Dan was having school education up to 4th standard. Under an order dated 18.4.2006, an appointment was accorded to the respondent Smt. Santosh Devi as Constable with Rajasthan Police. She then preferred an application as per Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to annul the marriage dated 08.5.2002. After service of notice of the application aforesaid the appellant filed a written statement and also an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights. The learned family court, Chittorgarh by the judgment dated 03.12.2014 accepted the application preferred under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act and granted a decree to annul the marriage dated 08.5.2002.
(3.) TO challenge the judgment and decree dated 03.12.2014, the instant appeal is preferred. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant preferred an application under Section 9 of the Act of 1955 to restore the conjugal rights and this fact itself is sufficient to arrive at a conclusion that he was never interested in breakage of marriage and further that he never extended any cruelty sufficient to grant a decree as per Section 13 of the Act of 1955. It is further submitted that even as per the evidence available on record, there is no material to have a finding of cruelty extended by the appellant giving a cause to annul marriage between the parties.;