^ft y' ·WS.IT P3BTITIQ!^0. 563S/2007 Smt. S. Alavelu (% Venu, ags SESPONDE.NT about 37 vears, wife of Shri S.V. iMagesliwar, resictent ot C/o M.M. ??"" 'C^^w.f^ J?^.h^^\7 r^i^r^t' Mia.ar' i-YcfJi l\Ctil0^l JLYGtllVv cxV i^/ii\'\^i, i-"S/iU. .-uu u-ociown uewancim, 'l'alisu anci T\\^i-i-f^-i- Q^lo^m-!^ (F"n-\ L^rii7^i JL'_-^^ i^ l-iCi.--.^ ^"L.ii i*^'\^;^ S V N^;JF'sl~n^^?'° ??.£3H. RP'^rl f^nn'n't 4( ^ <- i_;S^^^^L t-^-^-/^/l^-L ^. 2 'E^in ^^/""^y^ T^^t' ^3 ^ / ^^" 1 ~9 i~^r i^t rfr~^ i-^ ^* /^ ^? L-IL^^JL^C^, JL'^C?L.^J'^ -^y\^s.^_ ^/ j^' Gangman- 2, SouTh ' Easterr Ij;<-T^ iffT/ltT Q •ii<~l£1-I-l.-)-)-t-l ~D //-t T^- '\^ T Q Ji ~s G .L J-<-? ? nousing •".inm- i-liTT.'it i^l-T~l("i T^.-S c^.^-l- ijjlaspur [CU] ^ fl.-:^- T^^-;, ?;¥---.,;&ra-^s ^'^ ^;1^;S'.;^?S .,T .iutfuA^A '^AA^I-A ©~ —^.iLu*.yA~ASAj •a-i.r t; SIin Biiarat Kaiput, Aclvocale lor ttie petitioner. vtin K.K. smlia, Aa'.'ocate lor the respoKcteat, Bv tflis petition uncler Artide '^'27 ot ttie Constrnitiou ot 'ndia, tfle petitioner fias impugnea oirier clatect '2-^-^Wjf passecl Qy uie t-'ajjiily uoun, yiiaspur ui (Jwil Kuit NO. yuy/^uuy wflereGy tlie application preferred Dv tlie oetitioner 'sinder Section 24 of &e ''iiiif;u Ma.ms.ge' Act 2is.s been reiecteci. • • • 'ilie r'aitiuv Uourt lias reiecteci Uie appiK'atiofl ot Tuc petitioner on tue grouna uiat in tiie ]3roceecling uncier Section y ot ttie Minciu Mamage Ac't uiltiatecS Dy We responcieat-5us'';.3Ti!:t, a ^ecrcc o£ rcstitu.tioii ot coii]Ug?U- ngtits ws.s ps.sseci s.ucl t}je petitioner-wae was ciu'ectecl to cUsdiarge tier coajugal obljgation ti}7 ilvmg wrtn Eer fansuajicl. Hc'wever, tne petrtioner (lul not o&ey tne oruer ot tfae'i;oun ascl e'ven c'ynng reconcmaTiDn proceecling, sfie reltissc^. to iryG wit.li .^.er lni?3l'?sT].d. LcRmeft coujisel 1'or tiie D£titj.oD.ar sTi.UxB.i'ts xus^t ITOTU pemssd of' the rep3y to "Uie divorce petilion filed by fhe petjtioner; it WOT;M De eviclent tB.at stw "ras wiUng To res;de witti tbe j'espos'i.deat anci tor Uiat pnrpose, s&e fiatl goae to her jT.iisbEuld, Iicwever &y ttiat tiu^.e/ ti"5c rcsuoiicisBt st?y7teci resici-^iis ui SOEIS ott)&T D-I.SC& vv2ttioTit saw pre-isitunation to tfae petiUoner anct e Jius&anfS never raade smv attein'pt to talce tfie pe'BXionerv?rt>i jirm. A-, '•• y Qn Vjs other hand, learned counsel tbr Uie respoiiclent- liusbaa." argues tb.at the petitioner wijflully dici not comply wrtu the orc5.er of restitution of conjugal ngms. 'i'Ae respontient .&afl servet' tiie petitioner vsxii a registerefl uotice to resuiae uer matnmoBial otijigation uy resKiing WITJI iimi, iiowever Tne aDove notice a3so' remaiaed -ijji-replied asfl in these circumstances, tfle resEondeat haci no altemative remecly &ut te -iUe divorce petinon under SecUon 13 ot Uie rlmctu Mainage Act aiic!. tue L:ourr Delow. considering Vie conduct of fhe petiuoner nas zejectea tjae pctrtiu2i£ris TC-iUi'iil'y not residuig wstti tier i'lusDana. i iiave fiearct teamest counsei Jor tfle panies. 'l'De parties fiaye 'tgutea fliaijietncaj.r" opposne sTaii':i agamsx esch omer 30 Tiie matter ot complymg -wrta me orrter ol s'estimnon ot coajugal ngGts, rtcwever ttie 53!eauing ol T"e peTnioner in ims regaTd has not been taken mto coiisicseration by tfie i-'anuly G;ourt ui tae unpugiiect orcier. withorit going thrciugh tfae rival clauns of fhe parties, taking ia.to consitieration tiiat tbe petrtioner is ean3,mg admrttedi}' Ks. "'JVz.l- per montn as gaag siaa sn t&e KaiM^ays wsereas tne respondest is re°idin,g wifh her ,daugh,ter in. her parented home, tfais petition is aisposeu ot wrui a ^uirection to t&e responctent- I1USD311C'[ TO 13S.V 3^3-SJj,1.?.£U3JJ.CC •S.T U3..t? J73.T.C O? .r\S> l,i3CU/- 13fiT" Fn.Olllil ^5ok'i3ig to t^b.s pSB.dejj.cy' of tlie d.ivorce pi^cet?c;iii^ beibre tli.e trisl Court, rhe Faci'ly Court is directed' to expedite Uie proceeding and. concluc'e me saaie expecti'tiously preterab'y witain a penoct cl tnree Sd/- Dhu-endra Mishra Judge