Format For DV

 

IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY FAMILY COURT, EAST DISTRICT, VISHWAS NAGAR, DELHI, H.M.A. PETITION NO.

2017

IN THE MATTER OF:Sh. Pyarelal S/o Sh. Chiranjeelal, R/o 1/201, Trilok Puri, New Delhi-110091

Petitioner Versus

Smt. Meenu W/o Sh. Pyarelal, D/o Sh. Premchand, R/o Gali No.10, Makan No.12, Sai Nagar, Meethapur, New Delhi-110044

Respondent

PETITION FOR RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 9 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1. 

 That the Petitioner was married to the Respondent on 07.03.2011 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at Gali No.10, Makan No.12, Sai Nagar, Meethapur, New Delhi110044. A true copy of the card of the marriage as solemnized

 

between the Petitioner and the Respondent is annexed and marked herewith as ANNEXURE A-1. A-1.   2. 

 That marriage between parties was consummated and out of this wedlock, one girl child named Baby Ishita was born on 08.03.2014 at Trilok Puri, New Delhi. Delhi.  

3. 

 That in reply to para 3 it is stated that Respondent and his family belong to middle class and have deep roots in society and are very ethical people. The Respondent and his family are totally against and do not believe in giving and/or taking of dowry, and thus they had requested the family of Petitioner to have a simple ceremony of marriage and no dowry should either be offered or given to the Respondent or his family members and relatives. Thus huge expenditures on dowry articles, stridhan or welcome of barat is incurred at the behest of Petitoner and her family alone.

4. 

 That it is further submitted that as the Respondent and his

family don’t believe in dowry and as they have never asked the Petitioner or her family for any dowry, thus there is no question of being unhappy with dowry articles given in marriage. The allegations as to abusing the Petitioner under

 

influence of liquor or daily harassing or torturing her for 1,00,000/- and one motor cycle by Respondent and his father are denied. denied.   5.   That in reply to allegations in para 4 as to Respondent No.1 beating the Petitioner with belt on 17/05/2011 and as to suspecting her character and keeping her locked in a room etc are specifically denied as being untrue. It is submitted that after marriage, the family of Respondent No.1 gave Petitioner as much love and respect as they give to their own o wn daughter.  daughter.  6.  That  That it is also submitted that th the e Respondent No.1 has utmost love, care and respect for Petitioner and there was never any incidence of any type of physical or verbal abuse of Petitioner by the Respondent No1. 7.  That  That in reply to para 5 it is stated the on 08.03.2014, one female child namely Ishita was born to Respondent No.1 and Petitioner. It is submitted that Respondent No.1 or his family never had any issue as to the gender of the child. The Respondent No1 and his family love and care for the child in same way as they would have loved a male child. child.  

 

8.   That in reply to para 6 it is submitted that all the allegations as to consumption of liquor and gambling are denied as being false and malicious. malicious.   9.  That in reply to para 7 and 8 it is submitted that the allegations as to demand for dowry and physical abuse by Respondent

No1

are

denied

above.

The

allegation

of

Respondent No.1 stealing Petitioner’s earring (jhumki) is false and baseless. baseless.    That  it is further submitted that in August, 2014 the Petitioner  That

went

to

visit

Rakshabandhan

her

parent’s

along

with

home

on

Respondent

the No1

occasion and

of

their

daughter. However, without any reason and to utter surprise of Respondent No1, the Petitioner refused to return to her matrimonial house with Respondent No1.  That the Respondent No.1 repeatedly requested the Petitioner to come along with him at live at their matrimonial house. The Respondent No1 also said that their daughter needs both of them and they are both responsible for the upbringing of their daughter. Despite this the Petitioner without, giving any

 

reasonable justification, declined to return and decided

instead to live at her parent’s house with their daughter.   That after multiple attempts to convince the Petitioner to return to her matrimonial home, the Petitioner agreed to go back to their Matrimonial house in March 2016.  That it is further submitted that after returning from her

parent’s home the Petitioner was still under the influence of her Parents as her mother used to call her daily and tutor her that she should come to their house with her daughter and live with them. It is also submitted that though the Petitioner performed

all

conjugal

obligations

accordingly

but

her

behavior towards the Respondent No1 and his family was very harsh and abusive which resultantly inflicted mental torture and agony upon Respondent No 1 and his family members.

 That it is further submitted that Petitioner’s mother use to threaten Respondent No 1 that they will file false and frivolous cases against Respondent No1 and his family along with it the Petitioner used to taunt Respondent No1 on difference in their educational qualification and used to mock him by saying that

 

she is more qualified than the Respondent No1 and thus she deserves someone better than Respondent No1.  That is submitted that the allegation that the Respondent No1 picked up his minor daughter from the bed to throw her on the floor but was saved by the Petitioner is false and baseless. It is submitted that Respondent No1 loves and cares for his daughter a lot and he constantly keeps pleading with Petitioner that it is their responsibility to bring her up together and with utmost love and care.  That in reply to para 10 it is stated that all the articles and stridhan of Petitioner are in possession of Petitoner as on 25.08.2016 the Petitioner again left the house of Respondent No1

along

with

their

daughter

on

the

occasion

of

 janamashtami to visit her parents. It is submitted that the Petitioner did not return to her matrimonial house and despite multiple requests denied to stay with Respondent No1. The Respondent No.1 further noted that this time the Petitioner had taken along with her all her gold ornaments, clothes and other belongings on the pretext of a wedding in her relatives house.

 

  That in reply to para 11 it is stated that all complaints of domestic violence against the Respondent No1 are false and motivated and hence denied.  That it response to para 12 it is submitted that Respondent No1 has his own work of furniture and belongs to middle class family. The respondent No1 has limited means of income and even his source of income is not stable.  That That the Petitioner used to fulfill all the demands of the Respondent with respect to food, clothes and other basic necessities. It is further submitted that though the Petitioner has limited income and his source of income is also not stable then also for the love and affection that the Petitioner has for the Respondent, he used to go out of the way to fulfill the same. 10.   That the Respondent was well aware before the marriage that the mother of the Petitioner passed away and therefore, there is no one to take care of the household. The Petitioner and his family requested the Respondent only to take care of the household after marriage. However she never took any interest in any daily chores of the household. It is submitted that whenever any relative of the Petitioner came to their house,

 

the Respondent used to avoid them and took no interest to welcome them or to attend them. 11.   That in August, 2014 the Respondent went to visit her

parents’ house on the occasion of Rakshabandhan along with the Petitioner and their daughter to celebrate the said occasion

at her parent’s house. However, without any reason and to the utter surprise of the Petitioner, the Respondent refused to return to her matrimonial house with the Petitioner.

 

12.  That the Petitioner called his wife and asked her as to when

will she return from her parent’s ho use to her matrimonial house but the Respondent refused to return to the Petitioner. 13.   The Petitioner was completely surprised and shocked by such behaviour of the Respondent. He repeatedly requested the Respondent to come along with him at their matrimonial house however, without giving any reasonable reason to the Petitioner, the Respondent declined to return back to her

matrimonial house and decided instead to live at her parents’ house with their daughter. 14.   That the Petitioner tried to convince the Respondent to come back and also said that their daughter need both of them and

 

they both are responsible for the upbringing of their daughter, despite that, the Respondent refused to come with the Petitioner. 15.   That in March, 2016, the Petitioner visited the Respondent at

her parent’s house and made several attempts to convince the Respondent to go back to their matrimonial house with the Petitioner. After repeated requests, the Respondent agreed to go back to their matrimonial house and went with the Petitioner. 16.   That the mother of the Respondent used to call her daily and tutor her that she should come to their house with her daughter and live with them. The family members of the Respondent always used abusing language with the Petitioner and taunted and quarreled with him on one pretext or the other. 17.   That the Respondent performed all conjugal obligations

accordingly

but

it

is

submitted

that

the

Respondent’s

behaviour towards the Petitioner and his family was very harsh, abusive which resultantly inflicted mental torture & agony upon the Petitioner and his family members. It is

 

further submitted that the Petitioner kept on enquiring the Respondent as to the cause of her behaviour towards the Petitioner so that he could resolve the same amicably. However the Respondent never used to share with the Petitioner the reason for her behaviour. 18.   That the mother of the Respondent used to threaten the Petitioner that they will file so many false and frivolous cases against the Petitioner and his family. The Petitioner was shocked and was not able to understand the reason behind such nature of the Respondent and kept on asking the Respondent to share the same with him so that he could try to resolve the same. However the Respondent never disclosed the reason to him and rather misbehaved and abused him. 19.   The Petitioner bestowed the Respondent with the utmost love and care yet the Respondent, without any reason and on instigation of her mother, used to treat the Petitioner and his family members rudely and badly. 20.   The Respondent also used to taunt the Petitioner on the differences in their educational qualification and used to mock

 

him by saying that she is more qualified than the Petitioner and therefore she deserved someone better than the Petitioner. 21.   That inspite of all these practices the Petitioner and his other family members tolerated such a behavior of the Petitioner and loved

her,

maintained

her

properly

and

provided

her

everything of necessity. 22.   That on 25.08.2016 the Respondent again left the house of the Petitioner along with the daughter on the occasion of  Janamashtami saying that she wanted to visit her parents and promised that she would return the next day. It is submitted that the Respondent did not return the next day to her matrimonial house despite of Petitioner’s repeated request to come back and denied to stay with him. The Petitioner further noted that this time the Respondent had taken along with her all her gold ornaments, clothes and other belongings on

pretext of a wedding in her relatives’ ho use but she did not come back besides of all efforts of the Petitioner, family members and well-wishers but all in vain. 23.   That the Petitioner has made several efforts to join the company of the Respondent but the family of the Respondent

 

abstained the Petitioner from even talking to the Respondent or to their daughter, Ishita on one pretext to other. 24.   That the father of the th e Petitioner also made several calls to the father of the Respondent and requested him that he should persuade his daughter to return to her matrimonial house and live with her husband for the benefit and well-being of their daughter, Ishita, however the father of the Respondent blatantly and curtly refused to accept to his requests.

 

25.  That the Respondent by living away from the Petitioner is depriving their daughter from the love, care and affection of the father which is the utmost requirement for the child of such tender age. It is further submitted that whenever the Petitioner took any initiative to have a conversation with the Respondent about their daughter Ishita, it was always met with a negative response or unreasonable anger. 26.   That the Respondent, because of the reasons best known to her and under the opinion and counselling of her family members, is depriving their daughter, Ishita who is three years old from the love and affection of her father, the Petitioner

 

herein, though the company and guidance of the father is of utmost importance for the growth of the child. 27.   That the obstinacy of the Respondent has gone to such an extent that she is not allowing the child to meet her own father and other members of the family. That the Petitioner has not seen her daughter, Ishita since 25.08.2016 as the Respondent

has stopped bringing her to Petitioner’s house nor is she allowing the Petitioner to meet his only daughter. 28.   That since the Petitioner is not able to take care of her daughter on a daily basis therefore, the Petitioner does not know about the well being of his daughter, or whether she is being provided proper nourishment by the Respondent or about her physical and personal development, and therefore, the Petitioner is under constant fear that the unpredictable and obstinate behaviour of the Respondent will lead to further

deterioration of their child’s well being and development and will have an impact on the future of the child, who is of such tender age. 29.   That before filing the said petition the Petitioner has already made several calls and also visited the parental house of the

 

Respondent to sort out the issues between them through the parents of the Respondent, but to the utter shock and surprise for the Petitioner, the parents of the Respondent did not heard the request of the Petitioner and asked him to return without the Respondent and their daughter. 30.   That the Petitioner is left with no other alternative remedy

except to approach this Hon’ble court after the Respondent without giving any reasonable excuse has withdrawn from the society of the Petitioner since 25.08.2016, although the Petitioner still wants to reside with the Respondent for the love and affection he has for the Respondent and for his daughter, Ishita. 31.   That the Petitioner is ready to live with the Respondent as husband without any condition and is also willing to perform all the rights and duties of matrimonial obligations. ob ligations. 32.   That the present Petition Pe tition is not presented in collusion with the Respondent. 33.   That there is no other ground why relief prayed for should not be granted.

 

34.   That there is no unnecessary or improper delay in filling the present Petition. 35.   That there is no cohabitation between the parties since August 2016 and hence the present Petition. 36.  37.   That the cause of action arose when the Respondent left the company of the Petitioner without any reason, consent and permission of the Petitioner. It further arose when the Respondent was not willing to return to her matrimonial house even after receiving number of calls and personal visits at her parental house from the Petitioner and his family members. It further arose and is continuing, since August, 2016 as there is no cohabitation between the parties and the Respondent has failed to perform the matrimonial duties and as such the cause of action is day to day occurring and subsisting. 38.   That the cause of action accrued to the Petitioner against the Respondent, within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court on 25.08.2016 when the Respondent left for her parental house along with their daughter at Meethapur, New Delhi and it

 

continues to accrue from day to day till the Respondent comes back to the home of the Petitioner and resumes his company. 39.   That the appropriate court fee has been affixed.

PRAYER In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present

case, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to: a. 

pass a decree for the restitution of conjugal rights be passed in favour of the petitioner against the respondent;

b. 

any other relief, which this Hon’ble court deems fit and proper, be passed in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondent.

PETITIONER

Through Advocate

 

Place: Delhi Dated: