________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.org
Acharya Shri Kailassagarsuri Gyanmandir
૪૧૨
tution of his congugal rights and prays for an injuction against the defendant no. 2 by her written statement denies having obstructed the defendant no. 1 and states that the defendant no. 1 has taken Diksha of her own free will. Defendant no. 1 states that the suit is not a bonafide suit and cannot be entertained; that she has taken Diksha and renounced the world and thus owing to her civil death, the relationship of husband and wife is dissolved and that having taken the five Mahavratas, she cannot touch even, the youngest male infant; that her renunciation is complete and not word show as alleged by the plaintiff; that the defendant no. 2 has put no obstruction but that she has taken the Diksha of her own free will and as she cannot live alone. The defendant no. 2 and she live together. She thus prays for the dismissal of the suit. The points for determination are:taken Diksha ? (1) Has the defendant no. 1 If so is it bonafide for the good of her soul or is it a mere pretext?
an out
(2) If the Diksha is proved can the plaintiff have the restitution of his congugal rights.
(3) Does the plaintiff Prove his allegation against defendant no. 2.
(4) To what relief is the plaintiff' entitled. Finding
(1) Yes. It is genuine and not a pretext. (2) No. (3) No. (4) The suit is dismissed. Reasons The plaintiff now an old man of 50 and the defendant no. 1 now 42 years old were married about 25 years ago. They have no issue and the defendant as late as 1921 wanted to take Diksha. Her brother is a Sadhu having taken his Diksha
For Private and Personal Use Only
