By S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors · Published 22 March 2026 · Informational content, not legal advice
About this article: A general explainer prepared by S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors on a recurring type of dispute. It does not report a specific judgment or order, names no parties and gives no case citation, so it should not be cited as authority. Law and practice change; please verify against the current statute and primary sources before relying on it.
Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 allows a spouse whose partner has withdrawn from their society without reasonable excuse to apply for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights. The Supreme Court upheld the provision in Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha (1984). The constitutional validity of the provision has also been questioned in later proceedings, so the current position should be checked.
A restitution decree is not enforced like a decree for money or possession. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in Order XXI Rule 32, provides that such a decree is enforced by attachment of property and not by arrest or compulsion of the person, and courts have said that a spouse cannot be physically forced to cohabit.
The decree's main consequence is that if there has been no restitution of conjugal rights for one year or more after the decree, either party can seek divorce under Section 13(1A)(ii). Failure to comply may also be relevant to maintenance claims, depending on whether the spouse had reasonable cause. The decree is not an order to be executed against the person.