________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.org
Acharya Shri Kailassagarsuri Gyanmandir
૪૩
17 years ago, when the present defandant wanted to take Diksha 10 years ago and the plaintiff was unwilling to allow her, various advertisements were published to stat: that she has gone away, and after t! at, that she has stolen property. After this there was an understanding that the plaintiff would allow hr to take Diksha 5 or 6 months after. Nothing was done and the defendant has at last taken all the religious vows and taken Diksha in Magsar Sudi 11th of St. 1986 and has got complete renunciation so far as the present life time is concerned for the plaintiff. It is stated that as no permission was obtained from the husband and as the essentials of the ceremony were not performed. The Diksha is & pretext and the defendant should return to the Sansai' and allow him the restitution of his congugal rights and further states that even if the Diksha is proved according to Hindu law the tie of husband and wife is indissolvable and he can claim his rights as a husband. The second point is absolutely useless because if Diksha is proved, no Hindu law can force a woman against her religion and will to submit to the man's will and allow him X X X X X X X
The Hindu law to high class caste enjoins marriage for the purposes of an issue to perform certain rights of the parents and to prolong the race and not for mere satisfaction of sexual desires. In the present case the plaintiff and the defendant had 25 years married life and they have no issue and the plaintiff cannot insist mercy for his desires to have the restitution such a come is impossible and no civil court can inforce this by sending the
For Private and Personal Use Only
