The Supreme Court in the case Poonam Anjur Pawar vs Ankur Ashokbhai Pawar observed that non-participation in a proceeding of a restitution of conjugal rights has civil consequences.
The court made the said observations in the case wherein the transfer plea was moved by a wife seeking transfer of the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu marriage Act for the restitution of conjugal rights which is pending before the Court of Ld. District Judge of Dadra and Nagar haveli at Silvassa to the Family Court, Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
The court in the case observed and has noted that Order XXI Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure wherein it deals with the execution of decree for specific performance for restitution of conjugal rights, or for an injunction.
Further, the court while considering the facts and circumstances stated that when the party is against whom a decree for the specific performance of a contract, or for restitution of conjugal rights, or for an injunction, has been passed, has had an opportunity of obeying the decree
and has wilfully failed to obey it, thus, the said decree may be enforced in the case of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights by the attachment of his property or, it being in the case of a decree for the specific performance of a contract or for an injunction by his detention in the civil prison, or by the attachment of his property, or by rom the aforesaid provision.
the court stated that where the case seek transfer is pending and the place where the petitioner-wife is presently residing, this court is inclined to allow the captioned transfer petition.
The bench comprising of Justice CT Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar in the case observed and has stated that the nonparticipation in a proceeding of a restitution of conjugal rights, of the party wherein seeking transfer of such proceeding is absolutely impact less. In fact, it has civil consequences as is evident from the aforesaid provisions.
Accordingly, the court allowed the transfer plea.
