BEFORE THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY

COURT, JAMMU

MATRIMONIAL CASE NO. ______ OF 2023

Mr. Ravi Kumar PETITIONER

VERSUS

Mrs.Anumeha Kumari RESPONDENT

IN THE MATTER OF:

S No. Particulars Page Nos.

1 Written Statement alongwith affidavit
4 Vakalatnama
5 Court fees

INDEX

Place: Jammu

Date:

Filed by:

Respondent

Through Counsel
Advocate
 BEFORE THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY
COURT, JAMMU

MATRIMONIAL CASE NO. 1124 OF 2023

Ravi Kumar

VS

Anumeha Kumari

IN THE MATTER OF:

Written objections to the above titled

PETITION UNDER SECTION 9 OF HINDU
MARRIAGE ACT 1955 FOR RESTITUTION OF
CONJUGAL RIGHTS

The answering respondent most respectfully submits as under;

Preliminary Objections

I. That the present petition is not maintainable because the

petitioner has failed to fulfill certain mandatory statutory
requirements for filing a petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
The petitioner has not complied with specific timelines, notice
provisions, or other procedural formalities as required by law,
thereby raising doubts about the maintainability of the petition.
Hence needs to be dismissed with exemplary costs.
II. That the present petition is liable to be dismissed because the
petitioner has failed to exhaust or explore alternative remedies for
resolving the marital discord. The petitioner has not made a
genuine effort to seek marriage counseling, mediation, or other
forms of dispute resolution that could potentially reconcile the
parties without resorting to legal intervention.
III. That the present petition is also liable to be dismissed
because the petitioner is estopped from seeking restitution of
conjugal rights due to his own conduct or actions that have
contributed to the breakdown of the marriage. The instances of
cruelty, mistreatment, or violation of marital obligations by the
petitioner are highlighted, which render the claim unjust or
inequitable.
IV. That the present petition is also liable to be dismissed on the
ground because the answering respondent questions the petitioner's
bonafideb intention to restore the conjugal relationship. The
petitioner's actions or subsequent events demonstrate a lack of
genuine willingness to reconcile or fulfill marital duties, thereby
suggesting that the claim for restitution of conjugal rights is merely
a pretext to assert control or manipulate the respondent.
V. That the present petition is liable to be rejected and stern action
is warranted against the petitioner because the petitioner's claim for
restitution of conjugal rights infringes upon the respondent's
fundamental human rights, including the right to dignity, privacy,
and physical and mental well-being. Upholding the claim could
perpetuate a situation of emotional or physical harm.

Para-wise reply

1. That the contents of para no 1 admitted and the answering

respondent confirms that the marriage between the petitioner and
respondent which was solemnized on 03/05/2018 at Jammu,
according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The marriage certificate
provided as Annexure-I is acknowledged.

2. That contents of para no 2 are also admitted and the answering

respondent agrees with the statements regarding the status and
place of residence of both parties before the marriage and at the
time of filing the petition.

3. That the contents of para no 3 are also admitted and the

answering respondent acknowledges that the couple has a 3-year-
old boy child born on 29/04/2020.

4. That the contents of para no 4 are not admitted and the

answering respondent also denies the petitioner's claim that she left
the matrimonial home without any reasonable excuse. The
respondent asserts that there were serious issues of marital discord
and mistreatment by the petitioner, which compelled her to
temporarily reside for 15 days at her parental home at House no.
22 Janipur, Jammu. The respondent did not intend to permanently
desert the petitioner but due to some family issues at her parental
house she had to stay for longer.

5. That the contents of para no 5 are not admitted and the

respondent denies the petitioner's allegations that she declined to
return to the matrimonial home on multiple occasions. The
respondent asserts that the petitioner's behavior and mistreatment
were the primary reasons for her refusal to return.

6. That the contents of para no 6 are admitted. However, it is

respectfully submitted that a domestic violence case was filed
against the petitioner on 29/04/2023 and the respondent submits
that this was a legitimate response to the petitioner's abusive
behaviour and mistreatment as on 25/04/2023 in her parental
home and earlier in her matrimonial home.

7. That the contents of para no 7 are not admitted and the

respondent disputes the petitioner's claim of desertion. The
respondent contends that it was the petitioner's conduct that led to
the strained relationship and her temporary absence from the
matrimonial home. The respondent denies withdrawing from the
company of the petitioner without any reasonable or lawful excuse.

8. That the contents of para no 8 are admitted and the respondent

acknowledges that there is no collusion with the petitioner in this
matter.

9. That the contents of para no 9 are not admitted and the

respondent denies any unnecessary or improper delay in responding
to the petition.

10. That the contents of para no 10 are not admitted and the
respondent submits that there are legal grounds to deny the decree
of restitution of conjugal rights, primarily based on the petitioner's
abusive behavior and mistreatment.

11. That the contents of para no 11 are admitted and the

respondent acknowledges the existence of a pending criminal
complaint of domestic violence against the petitioner. The
respondent emphasizes that this complaint highlights the serious
issues within the marriage.
12. That the contents of para no 12 are not admitted and the
respondent does not contest the court's jurisdiction to entertain and
try this petition.

13. That the contents of para no 13 are not admitted, however the
respondent contends that the cause of action for the petitioner's
claim did not arise solely due to her temporary absence from the
matrimonial home. The respondent asserts that the cause of action
is multifaceted and includes the petitioner's mistreatment and
abusive behavior.

That the answering respondent reserves the right to present

additional defenses and arguments during the proceedings.

 Without prejudice to the forgoing para-wise reply the grounds

for rejection of plaint are submitted herein below;

I. That the answering respondent argues that she was subjected to

mental and emotional abuse by the petitioner, leading to an
unhealthy and hostile environment within the matrimonial home.
This mistreatment justifies her temporary absence and refusal to
return.
II. That the answering respondent asserts that the marriage has
suffered an irretrievable breakdown due to persistent
mistreatment and abusive behavior by the petitioner. Forcing
the respondent to resume conjugal relations under such
circumstances would be against the principles of justice and
fairness.
III. That the answering respondent highlights that despite her
grievances and attempts to communicate her concerns, the
petitioner has failed to make genuine efforts for reconciliation or
address the underlying issues in the marriage. This lack of effort
indicates an unwillingness to restore the marital relationship.
IV. That the answering respondent emphasizes that the welfare and
best interest of the 3-year-old child should be paramount. The
presence of ongoing conflict and mistreatment within the marital
relationship can have a negative impact on the child's well-
being. Resuming conjugal relations without addressing these
issues may not be in the child's best interest.
V. That the answering respondent underscores the pending
domestic violence case against the petitioner as evidence of the
serious problems in the marriage. This case supports the
respondent's claim that her absence from the matrimonial home
was justified due to concerns for her safety and well-being.
VI. That the answering respondent argues that both parties have
mutually agreed to separate, and there is no genuine desire or
willingness on either side to reconcile or restore the conjugal
relationship.
VII. That the answering respondent requests the court to consider
granting alternate relief, such as legal separation or dissolution
of the marriage, taking into account the circumstances and the
breakdown of the marital relationship.

Affidavit in support of the objection is enclosed herewith.

PRAYER

It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that this hon’ble court may
be pleased to;

a) Consider the respondent's legitimate concerns, the issues of

mistreatment and abuse, and to dismiss the petitioner's claim for
restitution of conjugal rights and;
b) Any other relief or reliefs which the court may deem proper
under the circumstances be also awarded to the respondent.

ANSWERING RESPONDENT
 THROUGH COUNSEL

Place: Jammu

Date:

BEFORE THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY

COURT, JAMMU

Ravi Kumar

VS

Anumeha Kumari

IN THE MATTER OF: Affidavit in support of written objection.

I, Anumeha, Age 28 years, W/o Ravi Kumar, R/o

Janipur, Jammu do hereby verify that the contents of this written
objections in Para No _____ to Para No _____ are true to my
personal knowledge and those of Para No _____ to Para No _____
are true upon legal advice received by me which I believed to be
true.

I solemnly swear/affirm that this affidavit is true and no part

of this is false and nothing has been concealed.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

Verified today on ____ day of May 2023 at Jammu that the

contents of the affidavit are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and nothing has been concealed therein.

DEPONENT

Date:

Place: Jammu
 GOVERNMENT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR
e-Court Fee

Date & Time: 19 May 2023

Name of the ACC/ REGISTERED USER: MOHD QADEER

LOCATION: HIGH COURT JAMMU

NAME OF LITIGANT: ANUMEHA KUMARI

e-COURT RECEIPT NO.: JKC5346785

e-COURT FEE AMOUNT: Rs. 30