AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rajes Kumar, J.—These are two appeals arising out from the order dated 10.8.2005, passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow, rejecting Suit No. 886 of 2001, filed by the appellant, for the restitution of conjugal rights and decreed Suit No. 688 of 2002 filed by Dr. Nikhat Jamal Siddiqui relating to divorce.
It appears that the appellant married with the respondent on 26.7.2000. The respondent was an Assistant Professor in Soudh University Riyad, which is a private institution. After the marriage on 26.7.2000, both appellant and the wife stayed in Gomti Hotel and thereafter went to the house of the uncle of the appellant at Nishat Ganj, Tisri Gall, Lucknow and thereafter the respondent alongwith her aunt Smt. Wasima Siddiqui went to her relative''s place without information of the appellant. On 27.7.2000, on the telephonic call of the wife, the appellant went to his in-laws house and after two days, the respondent came to the appellant''s house and remained there for two hours only. On 2.8.2000, both the parties went to Delhi and stayed at the house of the maternal uncle (mama). The appellant alongwith his father-in-law came back to Lucknow on 5.8.2000. On 21.8.2000, when the appellant went to his in-law''s house he found that his father-in-law went to Riyad. On 21.12.2000, his father-in-law told that the respondent is going to Umra on 5.1.2001 and will return to Riyad a day before the opening of University. The appellant telephoned the respondent on 4.1.2001 but could not receive any reply and thereafter, the appellant went to Riyad. The appellant came back to India on 30.1.2001. The claim of the appellant is that no proper treatment was given to him at Riyad by the respondent. The claim of the respondent is that immediately after the marriage the appellant started misbehaving with her and started demanding money. He was drunker and one day he tried to cause injury by knife and abused her with filthy language. It also been alleged that the appellant was regularly demanding money. Several allegations and counter allegations have been made by both the parties which resulted into divorce petition on behalf of the wife. However, the husband filed a petition for the restitution of the conjugal rights.
On the facts and circumstances, the family court found that a case of divorce has been made out by the wife (Dr Nikhat Jamal Siddiqui) and accordingly, decreed the suit of divorce.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
From the facts of the case stated in the order, it appears that immediately after the marriage the dispute between the parties started and they could not reconcile with each other and could not live as the normal husband and wife together. The wife had made several allegations against her husband (Sayed Farhand Faisal) about the cruelty and misbehaviour. The husband was not able to dispute the same. Almost more than eight years have passed and both the parties are living separately. It is informed that Dr. Nikhat Jamal Siddiqui is living at Riyad and Sri Sayed Farhand Faisal is living in India. There appears to be no possibility of reunion now.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the family court.
In the result, both the appeals fail and are accordingly, dismissed.