ORDER
Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 13.11.1991 passed by the Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Malerkotla granting a decree for restitution of conjugal rights in favour of the respondent-husband.
2. Parties were married at Patiata on 31.10.1976. a female child was born on 30.1.1977 and male child was born on 29.1.1986. A misunderstanding is alleged to have developed between the parties, on the ground that the respondent was instrumental in divorce being effected between Jasjit Singh (real brother of the appellant-wife) and Par-winder Kaur and on that ground the appellant went away to her parents house and never returned.
3. The petition was contested by the appellant-wife and the allegation that the appellant-wife withdraw from the company of the respondent-husband has been denied. It is stated that the real cause for the withdrawal from the company of the respondent was the attitude of the respondent towards the appellant, which amounted to a reasonable cause. Trial court accepted the petition of the respondent-husband. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant-wife has filed this appeal.
4. The matter was referred to the Lok Adalat under Section 20 of the Legal Services Act. But after hearing the parties and their respective counsel, the Lok Adalat observed that there was no possibility of compromise between the parties. The matter was, therefore, sent back to this Court for decision on merits.
5. Having gone through the record, I find that the approach adopted by the trial court in the matter is erroneous in law. The finding of the trial court is not based on sufficient material and is not sustainable in law. It is well settled that for recording a finding that the wife has withdrawn from the company of the husband, mere ipse dixit of the husband is not enough. Such a finding can be recorded only when the husband is able to clearly show that he is not responsible for the withdrawal by the wife from his society I find that there is nothing to substantiate the plea beyond mere self-serving statement of I the husband.
6. In view of the above, I set aside the finding recorded by the trial Court and hold
that it has not been proved on record that the appellant-wife had withdrawn from the society of the respondent-husband without any reasonable cause. Accordingly, this appeal
is allowed and the order under appeal is set aside, and respondent’s petition for restitution of conjugal rights is dismissed.