Kailash Prasad Deo, J. - (1.) Heard, learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey assisted by Ashwani Kumar Upadhyay and learned counsel for the respondent Mr. Abdul Allam, Senior Counsel assisted by Fahad Allam.
(2.) The instant first appeal has been preferred by the wife / respondent / appellant herein against the judgment dated 21.02.2017 and decree dated 24.03.2017 passed in Original (MTS) No. 177 of 2015 by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi, whereby, the learned Family court has partly allowed the suit and instead of granting decree of divorce has granted decree of judicial seperation under Section 10 read with Section 13(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment, the appellant (wife) has preferred this appeal. It is relevant to state here that the Original Suit (MTS) No. 177 of 2015 was decided by the Family Court, Ranchi, though the case was initially filed on 10.01.2013 before the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Gautam Budh Nagar (U.P.). But the same has been transferred vide order dated 15.01.2015 passed in Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1398 of 2013.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the impugned judgment on the ground that the learned Family Court has passed the order of judicial separation, though the same was not prayed by the husband / petitioner / respondent (herein) before the learned Family Court. Apart from this, the learned Family Court has not taken judicial notice of the fact that the appellant Nitu Singh and her child had been thrown out of house in March, 2011. Husband has never preferred an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal right before seeking divorce and there was consistent demand of Rs. 50,00,000/- from the father of wife / respondent / appellant.;