SIDDHARATH YADAV vs SMT. MADHU YADAV

Page 1 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}

CGHC010163842024 2026:CGHC:45544-DB
NAFR
Digitally
signed by
SISTA
SOMAYAJULU
Date:
2026.10.28
16:52:18
+0530
SISTA
SOMAYAJULU
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
FA(MAT) No. 155 of 2024
{Arising out of judgment and decree dated 1-4-2024 in Civil Suit
No.300A/2021 of the Judge, Family Court, Ambikapur, District Surguja}
Judgment reserved on: 13-10-2026
Judgment delivered on: 28-10-2026
Judgment (Full) uploaded on: 28-10-2026
Siddharath Yadav, S/o Krishnakant Yadav, Aged about 37 years, R/o Ward
No.15, Power House Road, Ramanujganj, PS/Tehsil/PO Ramanujganj,
District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Present Address Near Shiv Temple,
Gandhinagar, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh.
(Plaintiff)
... Appellant
versus
Smt. Madhu Yadav, W/o Siddharath Yadav, aged about 35 years, D/o
Mahendranath Singh, R/o Village Jamlapur, Near Baba Ganga Das
Ashram, PO Dhelwa, PS/District Gajipur, Uttar Pradesh.
(Defendant)
... Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate.
Division Bench: -
Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu and
Hon'ble Smt. Sushma Sawant, JJ.

Page 2 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
C.A.V. Judgment
Sushma Sawant, J.
1. Invoking the appellate jurisdiction of this Court under Section 19(1) of
the Family Courts Act, 1984, the appellant herein/plaintiff
husband has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment & decree
dated 1-4-2024 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Ambikapur,
District Surguja in Civil Suit No.300A/2021 ( Siddharth Yadav v.
Smt. Madhu Yadav ), by which the application filed by the appellant
herein/plaintiff husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955, for grant of decree for restitution of conjugal rights against
the respondent herein/defendant wife, has been rejected finding no
merit.
2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual
backdrop: -
(For the sake of convenience, parties hereinafter will be referred as
per their status shown and ranking given in the civil suit before the Family
Court.)
Factual Matrix
Admitted Facts: -
3.
It is admitted fact on record that marriage between appellant herein/
plaintiff husband Siddharth Yadav and respondent herein/
defendant wife Madhu Yadav was performed according to the
Hindu rites and customs on 7-5-2017 at Village Jamalpur, District
Gajipur (U.P.) and from their wedlock, a daughter was born on 9-9-

Page 3 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
2019, who is presently residing with respondent herein/defendant
wife Madhu Yadav .
-:Case of the Appellant herein/Plaintiff Husband before the
Family Court:-
4. The case of the appellant herein/plaintiff husband, as set out in the
plaint, is that the respondent herein/defendant wife is stated to be
residing with her parental family at the time of institution of the suit.
According to the plaintiff, at the time of marriage, neither the plaintiff
nor his family members demanded any dowry or other articles from the
defendant’s family, as the plaintiff husband was employed in
Government service and the financial condition of his family was
satisfactory. Before the marriage, certain customary rituals were
required to be performed at the groom’s family residence. It is further
stated that for the purpose of meeting the expenses of such ceremonies,
the defendant’s family forcibly deposited approximately ₹ 2,00,000/-
into the bank account of the plaintiff’s father and the said amount was
subsequently utilised for purchasing jewellery for the bride.
5. The plaintiff further pleaded that about one year after the marriage, the
defendant’s behavior towards him and his family members changed,
and she began picking quarrels over trivial matters, disturbing the peace
and harmony of the matrimonial home. She frequently threatened to
leave the matrimonial home and return to her parental house,
neglecting her matrimonial responsibilities. The plaintiff further stated
that the defendant was fond of Bhojpuri songs, films and fashion, and
that he and his family made efforts to fulfill her wishes, including

Page 4 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
arranging her participation in Bhojpuri channel programmes at Patna
on four or five occasions. However, the defendant continued to remain
dissatisfied, and her conduct gradually became a source of discord in
the matrimonial relationship. The plaintiff further pleaded that the
defendant frequently quarrelled over minor issues and sometimes
refused to prepare food. During her pregnancy, she insisted on visiting
her parental home and was accordingly permitted to do so in July, 2019.
A daughter was born to them on 9-9-2019 at Surya Hospital, Banaras.
6. The plaintiff further stated that, despite requesting the defendant’s
father and brother to bear the childbirth expenses, he had to pay
approximately ₹ 1,00,000/-. He also stated that, due to inadequate care
at her parental home, the health of the defendant and the daughter
deteriorated, whereupon he brought them to his house. However, after
the daughter’s Annaprashan ceremony on 28-2-2020, the defendant, on
1-3-2020, called her brother and left for her parental home with the
daughter without his consent and since then, she had been residing
there. The plaintiff claimed that he and his family members made
repeated efforts to persuade the defendant to return to the matrimonial
home and that he continued to bear the expenses of the defendant and
the daughter, but all efforts to restore matrimonial harmony proved
unsuccessful. Accordingly, he instituted proceedings seeking restitution
of conjugal rights against the defendant.

Page 5 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
-:Written Statement of the Respondent herein/Defendant
Wife before the Family Court:-
7. It is noteworthy that despite due service of summons, the respondent
herein/defendant wife remained absent on 12-6-2023 before the Family
Court. Consequently, the learned Family Court proceeded ex parte
against her. Therefore, no written statement was filed on her behalf.
8. The Family Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence
available on record, framed following issues and answered the issues as
under:-
z- fo fu"d"kZ
क्र चारणीयप्रश्न
1-
क्याप्रतिवादिनीबिनाकिसीकारणसेवादी
^^ ^^
प्रमाणितनहीं
?
सेअलगरहरहीहै
2-
क्यावादीदाम्पत्यसंबंधोंकीपुनर्स्थापनाकी
^^ ^^
प्रमाणितनहीं
?
आज्ञप्तीप्राप्तकरनेकाअधिकारीहै
3- okn \ ^^ -27 ^^
सहायताएवं व्यय कंडिकाक्र केअनुसार
9. Parties were given opportunity to adduce evidence and after completion
of trial, the suit of the appellant herein/plaintiff husband has been
dismissed vide judgment dated 1-4-2024 , being aggrieved against
which, this appeal has been filed on the following grounds:-
(i) The impugned judgment and decree passed by the Family Court
being illegal, erroneous and contrary to law, are liable to be set-aside.
(ii) The learned Family Court while passing the impugned judgment
and decree has failed to appreciate the evidence available on record
in its correct perspective.

Page 6 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
(iii) The learned Family Court has committed error in not
appreciating the fact that without any valid reason the respondent
wife left her matrimonial house.
(iv) The learned Family Court has failed to appreciate that the
appellant has specifically pleaded and has adduced the evidence to
the effect about the behaviour of the respondent herein/defendant
wife.
(v) The learned Family Court has failed to appreciate the evidence
and pleadings made by the appellant in his plaint which remain
unrebuttal by the respondent.
(vi) The learned Family Court has committed illegality in rejecting
the restitution of conjugal rights only on the ground that there is no
documentary evidence except the oral evidence of the witnesses.
(vii) The learned Family Court has committed error in taking into
consideration the statement of the respondent recorded under
Section 161 of the CrPC during investigation for the offence
registered under Section 498A of the IPC on 13-8-2021 against the
appellant.
(viii) No evidence has been adduced by the respondent to reject the
contentions made by the appellant, on the contrary, the learned
Family Court had taken into consideration the contents of the FIR
and the statement of the respondent recorded under Section 161 of
the CrPC to conclude that there was valid reason for the respondent

Page 7 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
to leave the matrimonial house therefore the appellant is not entitled
for decree of restitution of his conjugal rights.
(ix) The learned Family Court has committed error in coming to the
conclusion that the allegation made by the respondent in the FIR has
not been rebutted by the appellant in his plaint therefore those
allegations are deemed to be truth.
(x) The written statement and the evidence of the appellant itself
show that the behaviour of wife was cruel towards the husband and
the respondent has withdrawn from their society without any
reasonable justification.
(xi) The learned Family Court has committed error in not
considering the provision aims of Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage
Act which is to encourage reconciliation and the resumption of
marital cohabitation.
-:Arguments of the Appellant herein/Plaintiff Husband:-
10. Learned counsel for the appellant herein/plaintiff husband,
Siddarth Yadav , submitted that the evidence adduced on behalf of the
appellant before the Family Court remained unchallenged and
uncontroverted. Despite this, the Family Court, without properly
appreciating the said evidence, relied upon certain documents which
had not been produced by the appellant/plaintiff husband and
proceeded to decide the matter on the basis of such material. It was,
therefore, contended that the Family Court had ignored the
uncontroverted evidence on record and rendered the impugned

Page 8 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
judgment on the basis of material not duly brought on record, resulting
in an erroneous decision that is unsustainable in law.
-:Arguments of the Respondent herein/Defendant Wife:-
11.
Learned counsel for the respondent herein/defendant wife,
Madhu Yadav, submitted that the Family Court had rightly decided
the matter after due appreciation of the evidence and material available
on record. It was contended that the findings recorded by the Family
Court are justified and that no ground for interference with the
impugned judgment is made out.
-:Details of evidence before the Family Court:-
12.
Before the Family Court, witnesses on behalf of the appellant herein/
plaintiff husband have been examined as Siddharth Yadav ( PW-1 ) – the
plaintiff himself and his father Krishnakant Yadav ( PW-2 ). However,
no witness has been examined on behalf of the respondent herein/
defendant wife, as she was ex parte before the Family Court.
-:Analysis of the Appellate Court:-
13. At the outset, it would be appropriate to examine the objection raised by
learned counsel for the appellant herein/plaintiff husband,
Siddharth Yadav , that the Family Court, on its own, exhibited
documents that had not been produced by the appellant. In this regard,
it is pertinent to note that, under Order XVIII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, the examination-in-chief of a witness is ordinarily
recorded by way of affidavit. However, the witness is required to appear
before the Court for cross-examination, and the documents sought to be

Page 9 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
relied upon must be duly tendered and exhibited by the party
concerned.
14. In the present case, the plaintiff’s signatures appearing on the
deposition indicate that he appeared before the Family Court on 6-3-
2024 and duly tendered the documents produced by him in evidence,
which were thereafter exhibited in accordance with law. Thus, the
objection raised by learned counsel for the appellant that the Family
Court exhibited the documents on its own, is devoid of merit.
15. The list of documents itself makes it evident that Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-3 and
Articles 1 to 5 were produced by the appellant himself. Since the
appellant had produced these documents and tendered them in
evidence, they are required to be read as they stand, in accordance with
law. Therefore, the Family Court committed no procedural irregularity
in this regard.
16. As regards the further contention of learned counsel for the appellant
that the evidence of the appellant remained uncontroverted and,
therefore, ought to have been accepted by the Family Court, it is well
settled that mere absence of cross-examination does not automatically
establish a party’s case. The Court must assess the evidence as a whole
and determine whether it is reliable and sufficient to establish the
essential ingredients of the relief claimed. Therefore, the entitlement of
the appellant to the relief sought cannot be determined merely on the
ground that his evidence remained unchallenged; the same must be

Page 10 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
assessed in the light of the applicable statutory provisions and the
evidence available on record.
17. Since the relief sought is restitution of conjugal rights, it would be
appropriate to refer to the relevant statutory provision i.e. Section 9 of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which deals with restitution of conjugal
rights and which reads as follows: -
“ 9. Restitution of conjugal rights.— When either the
husband or the wife has, without reasonable excuse,
withdrawn from the society of the other, the aggrieved party
may apply, by petition to the district court, for restitution of
conjugal rights and the court, on being satisfied of the truth of
the statements made in such petition and that there is no legal
ground why the application should not be granted, may
decree restitution of conjugal rights accordingly.
Explanation .—Where a question arises whether there
has been reasonable excuse for withdrawal from the society,
the burden of proving reasonable excuse shall be on the
person who has withdrawn from the society.”
18.
The said provision stipulates that where either spouse has, without
reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, the
aggrieved party may seek restitution of conjugal rights by filing a
petition before the competent court. The Court, upon being satisfied of
the truth of the statements made in the petition and that there is no
legal ground for refusing the relief, may pass a decree for restitution of
conjugal rights.
19. The Explanation to Section 9 further provides that the burden of
proving a reasonable excuse for withdrawing from the society of the
other spouse lies upon the spouse who has so withdrawn. However, the
initial burden of establishing the grounds for seeking restitution of

Page 11 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
conjugal rights rests upon the spouse claiming such relief. Accordingly,
the mere fact that the evidence adduced by the appellant has remained
uncontroverted does not, by itself, entitle him to a decree. The Court
must still be satisfied that the statutory requirements of Section 9 of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 , stand fulfilled on the basis of the
evidence available on record.
20. Upon examination of the record, it emerges that, although the
respondent/defendant wife was proceeded ex parte, the document
Ex.P-2 produced by the appellant himself indicate that she had been
living separately on account of the alleged harassment. The Family
Court, after considering the material available on record, has assigned
cogent reasons for concluding that the petition for restitution of
conjugal rights was instituted to avoid the criminal proceedings arising
out of the FIR and the liability to pay maintenance. The Family Court
has further observed that, had the petitioner genuinely intended to
resume cohabitation with his wife, he would have made sincere efforts
to bring her back to the matrimonial home rather than instituting the
present proceedings after a delay of approximately one year and nine
months. The findings of the Family Court, therefore, are based on an
appreciation of the material available on record and cannot be faulted
merely on the ground that the respondent/defendant wife was
proceeded ex parte.
21.
The Family Court has assigned cogent and well-reasoned grounds for
not accepting the appellant’s uncontroverted testimony. It has rightly

Page 12 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
observed that, in proceedings seeking restitution of conjugal rights,
merely making allegations and counter-allegations is not sufficient;
rather, the appellant/plaintiff husband is required to establish that the
respondent/defendant wife has withdrawn from his society without
reasonable excuse and is living separately without any justifiable cause.
The appellant/plaintiff’s testimony, therefore, could not have been
accepted merely because it remained unchallenged, particularly when
the material available on record did not establish the necessary
statutory requirements for granting a decree under Section 9 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
22.
In view of the foregoing discussion, no interference with the findings
recorded by the Family Court is warranted. It is pertinent to observe
that, if the allegations made against the appellant/plaintiff husband in
the FIR and the consequential criminal proceedings are ultimately
found to be false, the appellant has appropriate remedies available to
him in accordance with law. However, having regard to the allegations
contained in the FIR and the material available on record, the
respondent/defendant wife cannot be compelled to reside with the
appellant merely on the basis of his uncontroverted testimony. As the
appellant failed to prove his entitlement to the relief claimed, the Family
Court committed no error in dismissing the petition. Accordingly, no
ground for interference with the impugned judgment and decree is
made out.

Page 13 of 13
{FA (MAT) No.155/2024}
-:Final Conclusion:-
23. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court finds no error in the
findings recorded by the learned Family Court regarding the appellant/
plaintiff’s failure to establish his entitlement to a decree for restitution
of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Accordingly, the appeal, being devoid of merit, is dismissed, and the
impugned judgment and decree are affirmed. In the facts and
circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
24. Let the decree be drawn accordingly.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu) (Sushma Sawant)
JUDGE JUDGE
Soma