JUDGMENT : This appeal is by the appellant/husband challenging the judgment and decree dated 03.09.2015 passed in M.C.No.50 of 2014 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Mudhol, by which the petition filed under Section 9 R/w Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, is dismissed. 2. The marriage of the petitioner and respondent had taken place on 26.01.2002. After the marriage the husband states that they were not leading happy marital life in their matrimonial home. At the time of marriage, the husband was not employed. Subsequent to marriage he states that he got job. The husband states that he took wife to the places wherever he worked, when the climate was not suited to the wife, the husband brought her back to their village where his parents were residing. It is the case of the husband that three years prior to filing the petition, the wife left the house and she is residing at her parental house. She also filed a petition for maintenance, later which was compromised. As per compromise petition the husband requested the wife to join matrimonial home. Further, it is the case of the husband that wife has filed one more maintenance petition at JMFC Court Badami and she has also refused to join the matrimonial home. There is no contact between the husband and wife. In the said circumstances, having no other option the husband has filed petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for Restitution of Conjugal Rights. 3. The wife filed her objection to the petition filed by the husband and admitted the marriage, denied the other averments of the petition. The wife in her objection statement submits that the husband demanded dowry and he harassed her to bring the dowry. As she was unable to bring the dowry, she sent out of the matrimonial house. She admits that she has filed Criminal Misc. No.304/2012 for maintenance. Further, the wife alleges that husband is of cruel nature and addicted to bad habits. She states that she is not willing to join the petitioner. 4. On the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court formulated a point for consideration, as to whether petitioner has made out grounds that the respondent being his wife is willfully deserted him thereby he is entitled for Restitution of Conjugal Rights. 5. She states that she is not willing to join the petitioner. 4. On the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court formulated a point for consideration, as to whether petitioner has made out grounds that the respondent being his wife is willfully deserted him thereby he is entitled for Restitution of Conjugal Rights. 5. In order to prove his case, the husband examined himself as PW.1 and two supporting witnesses as PWs.2 and 3 respectively. The husband produced documents at Exs.P1 to P5. The wife examined herself as RW.1 and also examined one more witness as RW.2. The trial Court on considering the material on record both oral and documentary evidence, has dismissed the petition filed by the husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Hence, the husband is before this Court in this appeal. 6. It is the case of the husband that he married the respondent on 26.01.2002. As on the date of marriage, he had no job and subsequent to marriage he got employment in Army and went to different places to discharge his duties. It is further case of the husband that he had taken his wife to places wherever he was posted and when the wife could not adjust to the weather he brought back her to his parents house. It is the case of the wife that when the husband left her in his parent’s house, the parents of the husband ill-treated her and they forced her to live the matrimonial house and to join her parental house, which made her to file Criminal Miscellaneous for maintenance. Ex.P4 is the order sheet of that Criminal Miscellaneous No.258/2011 filed by the wife which was compromised. Ex.P5 is the joint memo filed in Crl. Misc. No.258/2011, which reads as follows; xxx 7. As per the above joint memo, the husband agreed to take wife to the places wherever he is posted for working and further he has also stated that he would not ill-treat the wife. All this would go to show that the wife’s allegations are true. 8. Subsequent to the above compromise, the husband did not adhere to the above compromise terms. He again left the wife and he alone went to the place where he was posted. Therefore, the wife filed another Criminal Miscellaneous No.304 of 2012. All the above events would indicate the conduct of the husband towards his wife. 8. Subsequent to the above compromise, the husband did not adhere to the above compromise terms. He again left the wife and he alone went to the place where he was posted. Therefore, the wife filed another Criminal Miscellaneous No.304 of 2012. All the above events would indicate the conduct of the husband towards his wife. The husband in support of his case has examined PW.2 one Govindappa, his relative. As PW.2 is a relative of the husband, he has supported the case of the husband. During the cross-examination of PW.2, he admits the joint memo filed in the above said criminal case and also filing of petition for maintenance. PW.3, one Gangappa, who is also a relative of the husband admits filing of joint memo by the husband and wife. The evidence of PWs.2 and 3, who were relatives of husband cannot be believed. The wife who examined herself as RW.1, has stated that because of ill-treatment by husband and his parents, she has to leave the matrimonial home. She admits the panchayat of elders, who advised her to join the company of petitioner. Further the trial Court has observed that husband has filed the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, only to avoid payment of maintenance to wife. The wife examined RW.2 and relative of her. Nothing much is stated by RW.2 in his evidence. 9. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant states that the husband has filed a petition in M.C.No.69 of 2017 before the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudhol, under Section 13 (1) (ia), (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, seeking divorce. A copy of the petition is made available. In the petition for divorce, the husband makes an allegation that, wife has deserted and she is living separately for the last ten years. During her stay, she has tortured the husband mentally and physically and she has also filed false criminal cases. When the husband himself has filed petition for divorce pursuing the appeal against the dismissal of petition for Conjugal Rights would be of no use to the husband. The trial Court on consideration of entire material on record both oral and documentary has come to a right conclusion. No ground is made out to interfere with the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.