1|Page

Hindu Marriage Petition No. ___________/2021

IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF FAMILY JUDGE

AT VADODARA

Petitioner Aged Occupation

Mr. Ritesh Chandrashekhar Suvarna, 39 Yrs Labor Work

Residing at House No. 53,
Hariom Nagar Society,
AtmaJyoti Ashram Road,
Opp. Ward No. 10,
Subhanpura, Vadodara.
(M): 9723857372
V/s.
Respondant Aged Occupation

Mrs. Rekha W/o Ritesh Suvarna 35 Yrs Job

D/o. Bhaskar N. Anchan
Residing at: 2/222(3),
Shiv Shakti Nivas,
Saldana Compound, MudaiKad,
Beluvai, Via Moodbidri,
Mangalore, South Kanara,
Karnataka-5742131.
(M): 7022206974
8494834761

PETITION U/S 9 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT FOR

RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS

THE PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED SUBMIT: -

2|Page

The humble petitioner named above, most humbly and respectfully,

submits as under:-

1. That the petitioner resides at the above-mentioned address with

his parents. That the respondent is the legally wedded wife of the

petitioner and at present residing with her parents at the above-

mentioned address.

2. That the respondent married the petitioner on 06/05/2007 at

Vadodara as per Hindu rites and rituals and the said marriage

was an arrange marriage. That out of the wedlock the petitioner

and the respondent have one son namely “Hansraj” currently

aged about 11years.

3. That right from the time of marriage the respondent have been

indulging in acts which do not befit a daughter-in-law of a good

family. That there used to be petty issues at home but the

petitioner has never let those incidences come between the happy

couple life of both of the respondent and petitioner. That the

petitioner is completely blank about any serious issues

concerning the respondent’s well –being while residing with him

as the respondent never have discussed any such issues with the

petitioner.

4. That approximately after 3 years of marriage the respondent got

pregnant and in the Month of February, 2010 due to the reason of

pregnancy the respondent asked the petitioner to stay at the

respondent’s Paternal home for which the petitioner and his

family happily agreed. That this demand of the respondent was

completely agreed taking into consideration of the respondent’s

physical and mental health. That from the month of February,

2010 to July, 2010 the respondent never came back to the

3|Page

respondent’s in-laws but as the petitioner and his family were

flexible and understood the respondent’s physical as well as

mental condition and hence never pressured the respondent to

come back soon. That after consulting the respondent the

petitioner and his family had fixed the date of 13/07/2010 to

organize a Baby-shower as per the customs at their place. That

the respondent had happily agreed to the same and returned to

the respondent’s in-laws for celebrating the same, however; after

the said ritual was over the respondent’s parents asked to bring

the respondent at their residence which the petitioner’s family

happily agreed as the petitioner’s family treated the respondent

as their own daughter.

5. That after the respondent went to her Paternal home the

respondent gradually stopped communicating with the

petitioner. That after the respondent had been taken to her

paternal home the petitioner tried to communicate with the

respondent several times as it was very joyous moment for the

petitioner; but even after the said baby shower the respondent not

even bothered to even talk with the petitioner and even in the

baby shower the respondent was not even talk properly with the

petitioner. That as the petitioner was aware about the date of

delivery of the respondent, the petitioner had went for hospital

on dated 03.10.2010 and the petitioner was continued to be with

the respondent in hospital. That on dated 04.10.2010 the

respondent had given birth to son named “HANSRAJ”. That

even after delivery the respondent had gone at the respondent’s

parental home along with child. That after the birth of boy

‘HANSRAJ’, the Namkaran ceremony was also done during

November’2010 at the place of the respondent.

4|Page

6. That after the delivery the respondent went to the respondent’s

Paternal home and the respondent continued stopped

communicating with the petitioner but the petitioner use to try to

communicate with the respondent and also tried to meet his son

but the respondent always come up with different excuse and not

even bothered to talk with the petitioner, and the respondent’s

parents also not bothered to talk or communicate with the

petitioner. However, suddenly without informing the petitioner

or his family that the respondent were vacating the respondent’s

Vadodara’s residence along with her family had settled at the

respondent’s current residence in Karnataka. Nonetheless of this

incidence the petitioner used to visit the respondent’s Parents

home at the respondent’s Vadodara’s residence very frequently

at: 229, Ganga Sagar Soc., Chankyapuri, Sama, Vadodara, but

there were several visits done by client at this known address to

him but he was never informed that the respondent had vacated

this house with the respondent’s parents. That the petitioner had

last seen the respondent at the respondent’s Vadodara’s address

on 13.03.2011 as it was the birthday of the respondent and on that

day also the respondent had badly insulted the petitioner. That

later on the petitioner was informed by his common near

relatives that the respondent had sold of everything at the

respondent’s Vadodara’s residence and had settled in Karnataka

without any intimation or information to the petitioner. This

caused a lot of pain and agony as the petitioner was left aloof by

the respondent and he was also not able to see his son named

“HANSRAJ”. That the respondent not even bothered to provide

the address or where about of the respondent’s new residence at

Karnataka, and the petitioner all that period tried to find out the

respondent’s where about.

5|Page

7. That the respondent had constantly tried to contact the

respondent and his father-in-law but they never bothered about

the petitioner. The respondent and her family deserted the

petitioner like a stray dog. That thereafter a period of 4 years, in

July – 2015 the respondent’s father had called the petitioner’s

father and told the petitioner to come and visit and meet the

petitioner’s son- “Hansraj” at the respondent’s recent residence in

Karnataka.

8. That the petitioner was filled with joy and in about near tears as

he could see his child and the respondent after a period of 4 long

years. That with all of his excitement to meet his wife and Son the

petitioner went to Karnataka. That the petitioner was greeted by

his in-laws in a car at a bus stop as he was new to the state and

was not aware about areas of the state. That the respondent very

well knowing the same fact and had asked the respondent’s

father to take petitioner directly to the respondent’s lawyer

without meeting the respondent and son.

9. That at the respondent’s lawyer’s office the respondent’s parents

and the lawyer had threatened the petitioner of consequences if

the respondent would not Divorce her. That the respondent’s

lawyer and respondent’s father had also demanded for a sum

amount of Rs. 10 Lakhs as permanent alimony from the petitioner

and the respondent was constantly in touch with her father

during all this conversation and the respondent was even

assisting the lawyer and her father over phone, so it was clear

that she was very well involved in whole incident of pressurizing

and threatening the petitioner for divorce. That the petitioner was

completely baffled as he was only having a pure innocent

expectation of meeting his child and wife; however; the

respondent had mentally harassed him by putting such pressure

6|Page

on him. That even after this meeting the respondent’s parents had

not let the petitioner meet his child and directly sent him back to

Vadodara and did not even offer him to stay at the respondent’s

place or offer food.

10.That the petitioner was afraid when he came back to Vadodara.

That the petitioner’s brother-in-law had subsequently contacted

the petitioner to settle the whole matter and avoid the divorce but

the condition laid down by him had devastating effect on the

petitioner and he was completely shocked to hear that the

petitioner had to stay at his in-laws house permanently in

Karnataka by forgoing all his assets and parents in Vadodara and

completely starting a new life in a new city. Factually the

petitioner is born and brought up at Vadodara only and not even

knows the language of the Karnataka, and same fact was very

well known to the respondent and his family still they are

pressurizing the petitioner to settle at Karnataka.

11.That the petitioner openly offered on call that his wife i.e. the

respondent and his son could come back and stay happily with

him and discuss if any problem is faced by them so that he can

stand firmly with them and help them settle in Vadodara;

however, the respondent had completely denied this offer and

were adamant that the petitioner should all alone be settled at his

in-laws place.

12. That the petitioner had incessantly tried to take back the respondent
but the respondent never bothered for the petitioner and without

any just and reasonable reason the respondent had deserted the

petitioner since around 10 years. That the petitioner had tried to

communicate but the respondent had not even responded for the

same and the respondent just ran away without informing the
7|Page

petitioner and not even bothered to meet or contact the petitioner

and further not even allowed the petitioner to meet or see his son.

13. That it is crystal clear from the above mentioned paras that the the
petitioner had took very good care of the respondent. The petitioner

and his family has provided all the facilities and pleasures to the

respondent and tried his best to pleas the respondent day in-day

out, but despite that the behavior of the respondent has always been

cruel towards the petitioner and the respondent matrimonial home.

That the petitioner always tried his best to make the respondent

happy and to save his matrimonial home.

14. The respondent took all her ornaments and jewellery items to her

parent’s home.

15. That even after such repeated attempts to contact and took back the

respondent but the respondent never bothered to return back or to

even allowed to see the face of the son, having no other alternative

the respondent had sent one legal notice to the respondent on

dated 05.02.2021 and call upon the respondent to come back with

son at Vadodara to continue the marriage happily and in case any

default or delay done at the part of respondent then the petitioner

will file petition for restitution of conjugal rights and other

prevailing laws in India, and the notice was duly served on the

respondent on dated 13.02.2021 and even after serving of said

notice the respondent not even bothered to reply or communicate

her intentions.

16. That the respondent has withdrawn from the society of the

petitioner without any just and reasonable cause and hence the

petitioner is very sad & depressed and petitioner is entitled for a

decree of restitution of conjugal rights.

17. That the respondent is living separately from the petitioner and has

withdrawn from the society of petitioner without any reasonable

cause from October’2010.

8|Page

18. CAUSE OF THE PETITON: -

That the cause of action arose and is continue since

October’2010 when the respondent withdrawn from the society of

the petitioner without any just & reasonable cause and again on

February’ 2010, July’2010, and on and after March’ 2011 when the

respondent denied to get back in society of petitioner.

The cause still survives.

19. The parties most respectfully further submit :-

a. That in filing this petition there has not been any collusion

between the petitioner and the respondent regarding filing of

this petition.

b. That the Petitioner is not taking advantage of their own

wrong or disability, if any, for the purpose of relief claimed in

this petition.

c. That there is no legal bar that should stand against the relief

claimed in this petition.

d. That this petition is neither premature nor unreasonably

delayed.

20. COURT FEES AND JURISDICTION: -

That both the petitioner and respondent lastly lived together as

Husband & wife at House No. 53, Hariom Nagar Society, AtmaJyoti

Ashram Road, Opp. Ward No. 10, Subhanpura, Vadodara, therefore

Hon’ble court has territorial jurisdiction to try the cause.

Requisite Court Fees of Rs. 50/- has been tendered as this is a Hindu

Marriage Petition.

21. It is therefore prayed that the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

a. Admit and allow the Petition.

b. Grant an absolute decree of restitution of conjugal rights be

passed in favour of the petitioner.

9|Page

c. Any other order or direction which the Hon’ble Court may

deem just and proper may also kindly be passed in favour of

the humble petitioner.

FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONERS, AS DUTY

BOUND SHALL FOREVER PRAY.

Date:02.04.2021 ___________________________________

Place: Vadodara Petitioner

VERIFICATION

The petitioners verify that all that is contained in the present

petition is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Date:02.04.2021 _______________________________________

Place: Vadodara Petitioner

AFFIDAVIT

I, Mr. Ritesh Chandrashekhar Suvarna, Aged about years,

resident of 53, Hariom Nagar Society, AtmaJyoti Ashram Road, Opp.

Ward No. 10, Subhanpura, Vadodara solemnly affirm on oath that

whatever is stated in the petition is true to the best of my knowledge and

belief.

Date:02.04.2021 _______________________________________

Place: Vadodara Petitioner

I know the signatory

Rushikesh V. Pathak

Advocate for Petitioner