HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.2447 of 2001 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) This appeal is at the instance of the appellant/wife aggrieved against the orders passed in H.M.O.P.No.20 of 1998 dated 04/04/2001 on the file of Court of Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram, allowing an application filed by the respondent/husband purportedly under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking restitution of conjugal rights. Few facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the parties are married on 01/04/1988 and later they were blessed with two daughters. Thereafter, having regard to certain differences of opinions, it led to certain proceedings including the suit for partition among the family members. The appellant went away along with her brothers, and in spite of the requests, she did not come. In spite of the legal notice issued on 21/08/1998, she was not responded. Hence, the application. The appellant herein contested the application mainly on the ground that apart from civil proceedings, the respondent/husband is living with another woman, and hence, she has got every reason to stay away from the husband. On these and other pleadings as submitted by the parties, the Court below, after framing the point for consideration, proceeded with the trial where on behalf of the respondent/husband, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-3 were marked, whereas on behalf of the appellant R.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.B-1 and B-2 were marked. On appreciation of the entire material and evidence on record, the Court below did not find favour with the reasons given by the appellant herein and allowed the application. Hence, the appeal. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the material on record, the only question, which again falls for consideration is as to whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent is entitled to restitution of conjugal rights as sought for. There is no dispute with regard to the aforesaid chequered events with regard to the parties staying away from each other. The case of the respondent is that the wife went away for no reason. The claim of the appellant is that having regard to the fact that the respondent is living with another woman, she has got every reason to stay away from him. In support, she herself has examined as R.W.1 and also examined other witnesses as R.Ws.1 to 4. These allegations were denied by the respondent herein who was examined as P.W.1 which was supported by P.W.2. The Court below, after taking into consideration the evidence and material on record, could not accept the version of the appellant herein and found that the said plea that the respondent/husband is living with another woman is false. In view of such categorical finding, which is supported by well reasoning and since no other reason is pointed by the appellant to come to any different conclusion, we do not see any ground to interfere with the impugned order and we hold that the lower Court is right in allowing the petition for restitution of conjugal rights. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J ___________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 19th January, 2010 SKM