Navin Sinha, J. – Heard learned counsel for the Appellant and the respondent. 2. The present Appeal arises from judgment and order dated 15.3.2011 in O.S. Case No. 80 of 2007 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Vaishali at Hajipur dismissing the applicants claim for restitution of conjugal rights. 3. We have heard counsel for the parties at length. 4. The Appellant filed a suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called the ‘Act’) for restitution of conjugal rights. The respondent filed her written statement alleging cruelty and demand for dowry amongst other grounds and simultaneously prayed for a direction to dissolve the marriage by a decree of divorce. 5. The learned Principal Judge did not arrive at any reasoned conclusion why he was not satisfied to grant restitution of conjugal rights. Without there being any application for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, based on the written statement only he has passed a decree for divorce. By the very same order he has also decided an issue foreign to Section 9, for custody of the 7 years old minor daughter born from the wedlock. Discussion in this regard also being extremely cryptic and non speaking. 6. We are therefore satisfied that the order under Appeal in its present form dated 15.3.2011 is not sustainable in law. It is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Principal Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur for fresh decision on the appellants petition in accordance with law after hearing the parties. 7. The Appeal is allowed.