Dear learned members,
I am a working lady who has been driven out of her matrimonial house last year by her husband and in-laws. After a fews days my husband asked for mutual divorce. When I declined and wished to continue our marital tie, he threatened to file for contested divorce as soon as possible. My husband is still hell-bent upon divorce and not ready for any negotiation. When I consulted my lawyer he told to file for Restitution of Conjugal Rights, which I did. My husband hasn't filed for divorce yet, but has detached all contact from me and doesn't bother to appear in court either for RCR hearing. I guess I will get an ex-party decree.
But I am afraid, after I get the RCR decree and enforecement occurs, that is, I am dropped at my matrimonial house under police protection, my husband and in-laws will again torture me and I will be forced to return to my parental abode once again.
Now, under section 13 (1-A)(ii) of HMA 1955, it becomes a ground of divorce if conjugal rights is not restored within one year of RCR decree. I am afraid my husband will then file for divorce on this ground and can easily get his mission accomplished. When I brought this to my lawyer's notice, he said only the RCR petitioner can claim for divorce on this ground, not the respondent. He opined that "One cannot claim the advantage of his/her own fault.....If your husband doesn't bother to restore conjugal rights with you, thats his fault, not yours. You can claim divorce on this ground, not him"... Is he right?....I consulted a few more lawyers on this confusion and they all further confused me. Some lawyers said it is clearly written in section 13 (1-A)(ii) of HMA 1955 that "Either party to a marriage" can claim divorce if RCR decree is not restored, others said that there are preambles to this ground of divorce which needs to prove that the party filing for divorce is not claiming the advantage of his/her own fault.
I am hearing self-contractdictory opinions on this ground of divorce. Can anyone please give me the true picture?