that the Respondent in response to his Petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed written statement belatedly, after the period of 90 days prescribed by law. In the said written statement however, she has merely opposed the grant of relief of restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. According to the Appellant, in the written statement filed by the Respondent, no plea is taken about the alleged cruelty prior to April, 2002 pertaining to time period for which the Respondent had opportunity to plead the same in the Written Statement. Those matters have been referred to in the subsequent Petition filed by the Respondent praying for divorce under section 13(IA) and (IB) of the Hindu Marriage Act. According to the Appellant, the subsequent petition filed by the Respondent is obviously a counter blast to the Petition filed by the Appellant for relief of restitution of conjugal rights. It is then stated in the said application (Exh.5) that having regard to the plea taken in both the proceedings and with regard to the reliefs claimed in the said Petitions, in order to avoid conflicting decisions, in the interest of justice, it is appropriate that subsequent Petition filed by the Respondent after more than two years from the date of institution of the Petition by the Appellant, be stayed. The Appellant has also asserted that the parties to both the Petitions are the same. The issues involved in both the Petitions are directly
