TALUKDAR, J. ( 1 ) THE parties in the present appeal i. e. the appellant, smt. Rita De Chowdhuri and the respondent Sri Kalyan De Chowdhuri, are hereinafter referred to as 'a/r' and 'r/k' respectively. R/k as petitioner, filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Learned Court of District Judge at Burdwan being Matrimonial Case no. 370 of 1997. ( 2 ) GRIEVANCES, as ventilated in the said application, may briefly be stated as follows : marriage between the parties took place on 10th day of August, 1995 and it was duly solemnised according to Hindu rites and customs. After marriage the parties started living together as husband and wife. The marriage was duly consummated. Sister of r/k was already married. The parties started living at R/k's place with his parents. His father is a medical practitioner. R/k is a member of West Bengal Health Department. He was attached to Kalna Sub-Divisional hospital at the time of filing of the application. His mother is an old ailing lady. A/r developed hostile attitude towards the parents of R/k and started insisting for separate residence. She even started behaving in a cruel manner and became increasingly disrespectful towards the parents of her husband. She became pregnant and since then, her anxiety for a separate residence intensified and she further insisted her husband to reside with her at her father's place at Chandannagore, District-Hooghly. The couple became pleasantly burdened with a male child on 4th of October, 1996. R/k and his parents were naturally very happy. He used to visit his child quite frequently and also used to pay towards all sorts of expenses. He requested his wife to return to his place at Kalna when the child was about four months old. His wife straightway refused to return to her matrimonial home and she asked him to arrange for separate living. She was supported by her parents in such unreasonable insistence. R/k was not in a position to desert his old and ailing parents. His wife and her parents arranged the rice taking ceremony (Annaprasan) at Chandannagore on 10th April, 1997 to utter shock and surprise of R/k and his parents. He repeatedly requested his wife to come back to her matrimonial home along with the child but to no avail. R/k was not in a position to desert his old and ailing parents. His wife and her parents arranged the rice taking ceremony (Annaprasan) at Chandannagore on 10th April, 1997 to utter shock and surprise of R/k and his parents. He repeatedly requested his wife to come back to her matrimonial home along with the child but to no avail. His wife issued a letter under registered post wherein she claimed separate residence as well as maintenance and other reliefs. He received the letter and further requested his wife to return to her matrimonial home and restore the marital tie. He occasionally remitted money which, however, were refused. Since 13th April, 1997, A/r withdrew herself from the society of her husband without any reasonable cause of bona fide excuse and thus, deserted him. In the circumstances he filed the said case praying for a decree for restitution of conjugal right. ( 3 ) THE said case was contested by the present appellant as defendant. Written statement was filed on her behalf wherein all the material allegations made in the application were denied. She denied that her parents-in-law were cordial towards her. She alleged that her mother-in-law with in a few days of her marriage expressed that she was not willing to give marriage of her son with her. She also stated that her mother-in-law used to inflict unbearable mental torture in different forms. It was denied that she voluntarily left her matrimonial home or that she decided to have her first child delivered while staying at her father's place or that she along with her parents arranged the rice taking ceremony of her son at her father's place thereby ignoring the sentiment of her husband and his parents. She also denied that her husband or anybody on his behalf ever went to chandannagore to bring her back to her matrimonial home. She denied that she ever insisted her husband to live at her father's place at chandannagore. According to her she did not voluntarily withdraw herself from the society of her husband and deserted him on and from 13th April, 1997. It had been specifically claimed by her that she used to be subjected to various acts of mental cruelty by her husband and his parents. In response to their demand, her father paid cash of Rs. 40,000/- and gifted gold ornaments and other articles worth more than Rs. It had been specifically claimed by her that she used to be subjected to various acts of mental cruelty by her husband and his parents. In response to their demand, her father paid cash of Rs. 40,000/- and gifted gold ornaments and other articles worth more than Rs. 1 lac at the time of her marriage. Such gold ornaments were kept in the custody of her husband and his parents. But even after marriage, demands for further money continued and failure on the part of her father resulted in torture upon her. She used to be denied proper food. She did not have access to the kitchen and used to be treated as a stranger to the family who was not welcome. She also alleged that she was subjected to physical torture even during her pregnancy and her husband attempted to destroy the child in the womb. She never wanted to go to her father's place at Chandannagore for delivery of her first child but it was done under compulsion and on insistence of her husband. Her husband never bothered to take any care nor did he pay any money. Letter requesting her husband to pay for maintenance yielded no result. Her husband came to the house of her father on 9th February, 1998 and refused to see the child and told her that she and the child would only be taken back if his demands were met. Having been left with no choice, she filed a complaint being Chandannagore P. S. Case No. 25 dated 13th february, 1998 under Section 498a/406 of Indian Penal Code. Police recovered some of the articles from the custody of her husband and / or his relations on 14th February, 1998. She also filed an application for maintenance as she was denied access to her matrimonial home. ( 4 ) UPON the pleadings the learned Trial Court framed as many as four issues and after due consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances, by judgment and order dated 10th August, 2000, allowed the matrimonial suit and passed a decree for restitution of conjugal right. ( 5 ) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment dated 10th August, 2000, the defendant, as appellant, preferred the instant appeal. ( 5 ) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment dated 10th August, 2000, the defendant, as appellant, preferred the instant appeal. ( 6 ) THE relevant facts of the appellant's case are, in a nutshell, as follows : the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the pleadings as well as the evidence on record in the proper perspective. There had been failure on the part of the learned Trial Court to appreciate that initially an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act praying for restitution of conjugal right was filed. An application under section 13 (i) of the Hindu Marriage Act was incorporated by way of amendment in the background of the fact that a criminal case under section 498a/406 of Indian Penal Code was initiated against the r/k and the investigation of the said case resulted in submission of charge-sheet. Learned Trial Court was not justified in being under the impression that reconciliation between the parties was still possible. This was more so when R/k himself converted the application seeking restitution of conjugal right into one praying for a decree of divorce. It was strange on the part of the learned Trial court to think that marital relationship may be restored and the criminal case may be amicably settled out of Court at the initiative of the appellant/wife. Learned Trial Court was further not justified in passing a decree for restitution of conjugal right on the ground that there was no sufficient pleading of cruelty or that such cruelty was not proved by the wife and the burden of proving the reasonable excuse for withdrawal from society of her husband was lying with the wife. ( 7 ) IN the circumstances the present appeal has been preferred, praying for setting aside of the judgment and decree of the Learned Trial court. ( 8 ) BEFORE proceeding further it is perhaps necessary to mention that a/r does not seem to have any specific serious grievance as against any member of her husband's family except her mother-in-law. It seems to be the clear stand of the appellant that her mother-in-law's behaviour towards her left her with no choice but to shift from her husband's place and take shelter at her father's place at Chandannagore, Hooghly. It seems to be the clear stand of the appellant that her mother-in-law's behaviour towards her left her with no choice but to shift from her husband's place and take shelter at her father's place at Chandannagore, Hooghly. ( 9 ) LEARNED Trial Court formulated six points in order to determine as to whether there was any misbehaviour or torture on the part of the respondent's mother towards his wife so as to justify her staying away from her husband's place and insisting on separate residence. ( 10 ) IT had been alleged that after marriage appellant was told by her mother-in-law that she was in favour of arranging marriage of her son with the daughter of one Dr. Ramen Pal, who in that event would have given his nursing home to her son. There is no denial of the fact that marriage between the parties was a negotiated one and naturally appellant's mother-in-law always had the choice of withdrawing from the negotiation table. Learned Trial Court found it a wild and imaginary allegation as it did not find any mention in the letter marked as 'ext.-3'. ( 11 ) LEARNED Trial Court did not think that the alleged refusal on the part of the mother-in-law to take morning tea from her daughter-in-law amounted to an act of cruelty. It seems that learned Trial Court did not consider it as an insult when the mother-in-law immediately thereafter took tea from the maidservant. It was alleged by the present appellant that her mother-in-law did not allow her to butter the bread and used to tell her that she did not come from a family which was in the habit of taking bread and butter. It had been further alleged by the appellant that her mother-in-law did not allow her to use soap, oil etc. While appreciating evidence in this regard learned Trial Court observed that,"ln our society it is expected from a daughter-in-law that she would adjust herself with and reconcile herself to the changes in the matrimonial home, so as to make the matrinonial home happy and worth-living. The daughter-in-law who magnifies all such trivials in the matrimonial home demonstrate the bad traits of her character. The daughter-in-law who magnifies all such trivials in the matrimonial home demonstrate the bad traits of her character. " ( 12 ) ASSAILING such observation as made by the learned Trial Court it was argued by the learned Counsel for the appellant that the said observation is a direct outcome of failure to appreciate things in their proper perspective. ( 13 ) IT is true that the present appellant does not seem to have any grievance against her husband or his father. Her entire grievance is centred around alleged misbehavour on the part of her mother-in-law. In her evidence she has categorically stated that her husband has a duty towards his parents. She, however, seems to be insisting upon asserting her own right as a wife and her husband's obligation to maintain her properly. ( 14 ) A careful consideration of the evidence on record would clearly demonstrate that the present appellant is married to an educated doctor who is a member of the West Bengal Health Service. The fact that his father, though old and ailing, is also a doctor goes a long way to suggest that the family has respectable background. It appears that sometime after marriage the appellant left her matrimonial home and started residing at her father's place at Chandannagore, Dist-Hooghly. According to the appellant, consistent acts of cruelty on the part of her mother-in-law left her with no choice. On the other hand the respondent/husband thinks that there could be no rational justification for leaving the matrimonial home. Both sides in the instant legal battle seem to be equipped with certain documents like letters etc. in support of their respective claims. Unfortunately, the relationship between the parties gradually went from bad to worse with the filing of a criminal case under Section 498a/406 of indian Penal Code by the present appellant and her filing of a case seeking maintenance. ( 15 ) BEFORE proceeding further it is perhaps necessary to mention that once the marriage relationship is established, it is for the withdrawing spouse to establish that there is reasonable excuse. In the present case, admittedly the appellant along with her child are staying at her father's place. She, however, has been consistent in her assertion that she never withdrew from the society of her husband. According to her, she can't live with her mother-in-law. In the present case, admittedly the appellant along with her child are staying at her father's place. She, however, has been consistent in her assertion that she never withdrew from the society of her husband. According to her, she can't live with her mother-in-law. What should be reasonable or just excuse cannot be formulated in a straight jacket yardstick. And, it has to vary from one case to another. ( 16 ) IT is laid down in Halsbury and Rayden that "there is no absolute rule whereby either party is entitled to dictate to the other where the matrimonial home shall be; the matter is to be settled by agreement between the parties, by a process of give and take and by reasonable accommodation. . . . . . Neither party, it has been said, has a casting vote. " ( 17 ) IT is settled law in our country as well as in America and England that a wife is entitled to insist that she should not be exposed to the unpleasantness of the relatives of her husband and that suitable provisions should be made for her to live with her husband in privacy. The husband may have the right to choose the domicile for the wife-of course, not one which is injurious to her health. ( 18 ) IN the instant case the husband alleged that his wife, 'a/r', left her matrimonial home. But the wife's plea is that she was compelled to leave and take shelter at her father's place being unable to bear with torture inflicted on her by her mother-in-law. ( 19 ) THERE are specific evidence in support of the claim that the wife, 'a/r', was subjected to mental torture in various forms. Her mother-in-law did not come to deny the same though such evidence was sought to be assailed by evidence adduced by and on behalf of the respondent/husband. ( 20 ) SIGNIFICANTLY enough, learned Trial Court did not disbelieve or discard the evidence that appellant's mother-in-law refused to take tea from her daughter-in-law or made unpleasant comment while her daughter-in-law took bread with butter. Learned Trial Court in its own wisdom defined the role of a daughter-in-law and that too, for the betterment of society and in the interest of peace and happiness of a family. But the society has undergone radical change. Learned Trial Court in its own wisdom defined the role of a daughter-in-law and that too, for the betterment of society and in the interest of peace and happiness of a family. But the society has undergone radical change. With the progress of science and advancement in technology the world has practically been converted into a global village. In the words of Rabindra Nath Tagore, "we are living in the world of Jack and Giant. The Giant is not a gigantic man but a multitude of men turned into a gigantic system. " In such a fast changing society the role of women has also undergone significant changes. No doubt, women by and large have been victims of social exploitation for centuries. The cases of bride burning, the instances of dowry demands put us into shame. Fortunately, a change for the better is not far off. It is expected that with education and economic independence, a day will come when the women quite rightly will find their due place in our society. In fact, that will be the starting point for the proper growth and development of a healthy society. ( 21 ) REFUSAL to take tea and unpleasant comments referring to daughter-in-laws background, nodoubt, hurt the sentiment of a sensitive mind. It may not appear to be an insult to many but we are concerned with the impact of such behaviour in the mind of the present appellant. There are occasions in life when one feels that even minor physical assault is better than painful indifference. In such backdrop appellant/wife's reluctance to stay with her mother-in-law cannot be said to be unreasonable. ( 22 ) BUT the present appellant, 'a/r', does not seem to be unaware of the fact that her husband has his duties towards his parents. She, however, has insisted on a separate residence for herself without ever thinking of disowning her husband or abandoning her marital relationship. The respondent/husband being a member of the West Bengal Service is doing a transferable job. It is not for us to consider as to how he can continue in the same place for an indefinite period. But it was very much possible for him to appreciate the grievance of his wife and without showing any disrespect or hostility towards his mother, he could have very well struck a balance and he could have arranged separate accommodation for his wife. But it was very much possible for him to appreciate the grievance of his wife and without showing any disrespect or hostility towards his mother, he could have very well struck a balance and he could have arranged separate accommodation for his wife. It is not the case of the respondent/husband, as petitioner, praying for a decree for restitution of conjugal right that he ever attempted to accommodate his wife in a place separate from that of her mother-in-law. An obedient ideal son need not necessarily be a cruel, indifferent husband. Complexities of life and particularly of a modern family demands that one should have a multidimensional personality. ( 23 ) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the respondent/husband, 'r/k', referring to the decision in the case of Siddik Mahomed Shah v. Mt Saran and Ors. , as reported in AIR 1930 Privy Council, 57 (1), submitted that where a claim has never been made in the defence presented no amount of evidence can be looked into upon a plea which was never put forward. It was argued that the evidence of the wife regarding separate residence is not within her pleadings. Decision in the case of Maqboolunnisa v. Mohd. Saleha Quaraishi as reported in JT 1998 (9) SC 40 was also referred to in this context. But it was clearly stated in the pleadings that the appellant/ wife always intended to remain in her matrimonial home along with her husband in spite of torture. In fact, she also appears to have gone a step further with the passing of time and change in complexion of the relationship between the parties. ( 24 ) IT is the categorical stand of the appellant/wife, 'a/r', in the present case that she did not intend to withdraw from the society of her husband but was under painful compulsion to leave her matrimonial home. She in various ways has expressed her eagerness to join her husband at a place separate from that of her mother-in-law. It is not that she has imposed any condition for such separate residence so as to make it difficult for her husband to make such arrangement. She in various ways has expressed her eagerness to join her husband at a place separate from that of her mother-in-law. It is not that she has imposed any condition for such separate residence so as to make it difficult for her husband to make such arrangement. ( 25 ) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent/husband, 'r/k', referring to the decision in the case of K. Kanthimathi v. S. P. Iyer, reported in AIR 1974 Kerala 124 submitted that the Court is to be guided by the fundamental and the basic rule of matrimonial law that it is the right of each spouse to have the society and comfort, consortium, of the other. According to learned counsel, so long as the residence of the aged parents of the husband under the same roof with him is not provocative of creating circumstances grave enough to subvert the wife's right to consortium of her husband, the wife has no right to separate residence with her husband away from his parents. ( 26 ) THE facts and circumstances of the said case are, however, distinctly and significantly different from those of the present case. ( 27 ) IT was submitted on behalf of the appellant/wife that the petitioner in a case praying for restitution of conjugal right must fail if the respondent proves that the petitioner is not sincere in his request and there is some incompatible ulterior object. In this context reference was made to the decision in the case of Jogindra Kaur v. Shiveharan Singh reported in AIR 1965 Jammu and Kashmir 95. It was contended that it is necessary for the grant of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights that the other party should without reasonable excuse withdraw from the society of the respondent. But where such withdrawal is unavoidable and is an inevitable outcome of cruel treatment, it cannot be said to be unreasonable excuse or unjust cause. ( 28 ) OUR attention was drawn to the decision in the case of Kamal kumar Basu v. Kalyani Basu reported in AIR 1988 Calcutta 111, wherein it was held that mere living apart or leaving the home without any intention to bring cohabitation permanently to an end or to bring an end to the entire marital relationship for ever does not and cannot constitute desertion. There is no such material before this Court so as to show that there was a determination on the part of the present appellant/wife to put an end to marital relation and cohabitation. There is noting concrete so as to establish that the appellant/wife voluntarily withdrew from the society of her husband. ( 29 ) IN the facts and circumstances of the present case it can be clearly said that the appellant/wife is reluctant to return to Kalna if she is compelled to live there along with her mother-in-law. Many unpleasant things have, nodoubt, taken place in the form of appellant/wife's filing of an application seeking maintenance and her initiating a criminal case under sections 498a/406 of Indian Penal Code. Learned Trial Court in a rather optimistic manner has thought of mutual settlement and has further suggested that the appellant/wife may very well choose not to proceed with the criminal case. But his wishful thinking cannot be thrust upon the appellant/wife and her exercise of discretion cannot be questioned herein. ( 30 ) RESPONDENT/husband, as P. W.-1, in his deposition before the learned Trial Court has nodoubt supported the case as made out in the application praying for a decree for restitution of conjugal right. His evidence has been sought to be corroborated by another witness, P. W.-2, who stated that he never saw Kalyan's parents to ill-treat or misbehave with their daughter-in-law. In response to this, the appellant/wife, as OPW-1, has categorically supported the allegations made in the written statement/she clearly stated about acts of maltreatment on the part of her mother-in-law. True, her evidence in regard to her mother-in-law attempting to kill her by keeping the knob of gas oven open failed to inspire confidence of the court and quite rightly so. Curiously enough, such appellant/wife, as OPW-1, also stated that her mother-in-law gave her gold ornament when she first came to her matrimonial home. She further deposed that parents of kalyan liked her and Kalyan agreed to marry as she was upto their choice. Much has been sought to be read by the learned Counsel for the respondent/ husband in the said evidence but the said evidence in the context of the entire materials-on-record do not succeed to bring about any significant change in complexion. Much has been sought to be read by the learned Counsel for the respondent/ husband in the said evidence but the said evidence in the context of the entire materials-on-record do not succeed to bring about any significant change in complexion. ( 31 ) IT cannot be denied that the pespondent/husband is doing a transferable job and the assertion made by OPW-1 that she does not mind waiting for her husband's transfer outside Kalna seems to be quite significant. ( 32 ) THUS, the evidence on record does not support the respondent/ husband so as to establish that the appellant/wife left her matrimonial home without any reasonable cause or just excuse. On the other hand, the appellant/wife established to the satisfaction of the judicial conscience of the Court that she was in no mood to leave her husband or abandon the marital tie. Learned Trial Court observed that "there was no animus deserdendi on the part of the wife because she expressed her willingness and desire to live with her husband, but a condition was imposed that separate residence would be ensured for her. The demand of the opposite party/wife for separate residence is not at all justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. " But having regard to the discussion as made above and in the facts and circumstances of the present case we find it difficult to agree and share the views of the learned Court that the appellant/ wife has no reasonable cause to stay separately. There is nothing concrete or cogent before the Court so as to suggest that the appellant/wife has any inclination to withdraw from the society of the respondent/husband and in that view of the matter, there cannot be any decree for restitution of conjugal right. ( 33 ) ACCORDINGLY, we are not in agreement with the views of the learned trial Court and, as such the appeal stands allowed, the judgment and order dated 10th August, 2000 which is under challenge before us stands set aside. The petition praying for restitution of conjugal right under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the respondent/husband before the learned Trial Court accordingly stands dismissed. ( 34 ) IN the nature and background of the case there is no order as to costs. The petition praying for restitution of conjugal right under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the respondent/husband before the learned Trial Court accordingly stands dismissed. ( 34 ) IN the nature and background of the case there is no order as to costs. Xerox certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties on payment of requisite fees on priority basis.