V.P. Tyagi, J. - (1.) THIS appeal of Gurmej Singh is directed against the judgment of the learned District Judge, Shri Ganganagar dated 23rd August 1974 granting a decree for the restitution of conjugal rights in favour of the wife against her husband appellant.
(2.) MST . Jasbir Kaur was married to the appellant Gurmej Singh on 6th January, 1969. She was taken after marriage the village Bhuttawali, where Gurmej Singh used to live, and where she stayed for night. It is said that according the customs prevalent among the parties, she was back to her father's house. According to the averment made by Mst. Jasbir she was again taken to Bhuttawali where she stayed for 3 months. During this brief stay she experienced that she was not welcomed by the parents of the appellant because they were of opinion that the adequate dowry was not brought by Mst. Jasbir Kaur. Gurmej Singh, it appears, in the beginning was willing to bring Mst. Jasbir Kaur from her father's house as apparent from the letter Ex. A. 1(C) written by Gurmej Singh to the brother of Mst. Jasbir Kaur but later on he also fell in line with his patents and withdrew himself from the company of his wife and refused to bring her to his house inspite of all the efforts made by or on behalf of Mst. Jasbir Kaur. She therefore, field an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act praying for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The suit was filed on 19th August 1972. Gurmej Singh came out with a very strange plea that the marriage was performed on account of fraud & that fraud was detected at the time when the marriage was being solemnised. According to Gurmej Singh when the priest was reciting Ardas he called bride's father's name as Hamir Singh where as according to the appellant the marriage was arranged between him and the daughter of Pratap Singh. He, therefore, immediately protested that the fraud was committed. He denied this allegation that because the dowry was not given by the parents of the bride according to their expectation, the wife was abandoned by a.m. He also took a plea that the age of Mst. Jasbir Kaur was 30 years which was not disclosed to him whereas the marriage of her younger sisters had taken place much earlier. The appellant also pleaded that when the fraud became clear to him he went to the house of his father -in -law and reprimanded them for having arranged the marriage by playing fraud and on this it is said that the father of Mst. Jasbir Kaur assured the appellant that if the articles received in dowry were returned, then they would agree to the dissolution of the marriage.
(3.) THE trial court after recording the evidence on behalf of both the parties came to the conclusion that the plea of fraud taken by Gurmej Singh appears to be a false story based on fraud itself and therefore, passed a decree in favour of Mst. Jasbir Kaur for the restitution of conjugal rights.;