web analytics

Menu

Skip to content
Shades of Knife
  • Home
  • True Colors of a Vile Wife
  • Need Inspiration?
  • Blog Updates
  • SOK Gallery
  • Vile News Reporter
  • About Me
  • Contact Me

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Tag: HM Act 9 – Restitution of conjugal right

Life Cycle Stages of a Restitution of Conjugal Rights Case

Posted on February 27 by Suprajaa Rajan

A Step-by-Step Guide Under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 : Understanding the procedural journey of a Restitution of Conjugal Rights case under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act helps spouses navigate matrimonial litigation with clarity and preparedness.

Restitution of Conjugal Rights is a matrimonial remedy available under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. This provision allows an aggrieved spouse to seek a court order directing the other spouse to resume cohabitation.

The court grants relief only if it finds that one spouse has withdrawn from the society of the other without reasonable cause. This article explains the complete life cycle of a Restitution of Conjugal Rights case in a structured manner.

1. Legal Foundation of Restitution of Conjugal Rights

Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 governs this remedy. The petitioner must prove withdrawal from marital society. The withdrawal must lack reasonable excuse.

The court examines whether the marriage remains legally valid. The court also verifies that no legal ground bars relief.

This remedy aims to preserve marriage rather than dissolve it.

2. Stage One: Pre-Filing Consultation and Case Assessment

The process begins with detailed consultation with a matrimonial lawyer. The lawyer evaluates whether the facts satisfy Section 9 requirements.

The petitioner must establish three essential elements:

  • A valid subsisting marriage.

  • Withdrawal by the respondent from marital society.

  • Absence of reasonable cause for such withdrawal.

The petitioner collects supporting documents before filing. These documents may include marriage certificate, communication records, and proof of separation.

Legal preparation strengthens the petition and reduces procedural objections.

3. Stage Two: Filing of Petition Before Family Court

The petitioner files a petition before the competent Family Court. Jurisdiction depends on residence of parties or place of marriage.

The petition contains material facts of the marriage. It specifies the date of marriage and details of separation. It clearly states how the respondent withdrew without reasonable cause. The petitioner prays for a decree directing restitution of conjugal rights.

After scrutiny, the court registers the petition and issues notice.

4. Stage Three: Service of Notice to the Respondent

The court ensures proper service of notice upon the respondent. Service of notice guarantees compliance with principles of natural justice.

The notice specifies the date of first hearing. The respondent must appear personally or through counsel. If the respondent fails to appear, the court may proceed ex parte.

Proper service validates subsequent proceedings.

5. Stage Four: Filing of Written Statement

The respondent files a written statement in response to the petition. The written statement addresses each allegation made by the petitioner. The respondent may deny withdrawal from marital society. The respondent may also assert reasonable cause for separation.

Common defences include cruelty, harassment, or apprehension of harm. The burden shifts to the respondent to prove reasonable excuse.

This stage defines the core dispute between the parties.

6. Stage Five: Reconciliation and Mediation Efforts

Family Courts prioritise reconciliation in matrimonial matters. The court may refer the parties to mediation or counseling. The judge may personally attempt settlement during hearings. The objective is restoration of marital harmony.

If reconciliation succeeds, the parties resume cohabitation. If reconciliation fails, the matter proceeds to trial.

This stage reflects the restorative intent of Section 9.

7. Stage Six: Framing of Issues

If disputes remain, the court frames issues for adjudication. Issues identify disputed questions of fact and law.

Typical issues may include:

  • Whether the respondent withdrew from marital society.

  • Whether such withdrawal lacked reasonable cause.

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to decree under Section 9.

Framing of issues narrows the scope of trial. It guides the evidence stage systematically.

8. Stage Seven: Evidence and Trial

The petitioner presents evidence first. The petitioner may submit oral testimony and documentary proof. Witnesses may testify regarding separation and conduct of parties. The respondent has the right to cross-examine the petitioner.

After petitioner’s evidence, the respondent presents defence evidence. The respondent may produce documents and witnesses. The petitioner may cross-examine defence witnesses. The Court records all testimonies carefully.

The trial ensures fairness and evidentiary scrutiny.

9. Stage Eight: Final Arguments

After completion of evidence, the court schedules final arguments. Both parties present legal submissions through their advocates. The petitioner argues absence of reasonable cause. The respondent argues justification for withdrawal.

Counsel may rely on judicial precedents interpreting Section 9. The court evaluates facts and legal principles carefully.

Final arguments assist the court in reaching a reasoned decision.

10. Stage Nine: Judgment and Decree

The court delivers judgment after analysing pleadings and evidence. The judgment contains findings on each framed issue. If satisfied, the court grants a decree of restitution of conjugal rights.The decree directs the respondent to resume cohabitation. If the court finds reasonable cause for withdrawal, it dismisses the petition.

The decree is enforceable under civil procedure mechanisms.

11. Enforcement of Decree

The decree does not compel physical force for cohabitation. The law does not permit forced marital relations. The decree operates through attachment of property under execution proceedings. Non-compliance may result in attachment of respondent’s property.

However, courts prioritise voluntary compliance over coercive enforcement.

12. Consequences of Non-Compliance

Non-compliance has important legal consequences. If no cohabitation occurs for one year after decree, either party may seek divorce. Section 13(1A) of the Hindu Marriage Act provides this ground. Thus, restitution proceedings may indirectly lead to divorce.

This provision balances reconciliation with eventual finality.

13. Appeal and Post-Judgment Remedies

An aggrieved party may file an appeal before the appropriate appellate court. Appeals must comply with limitation periods under applicable law. The appellate court reviews legal and factual findings.The court may affirm, modify, or set aside the decree.

Parties may also seek review under limited circumstances.

Conclusion

A Restitution of Conjugal Rights case follows a structured judicial pathway. The remedy aims to preserve marriage rather than dissolve it.Each procedural stage ensures fairness, reconciliation, and legal scrutiny. Understanding the life cycle empowers individuals to approach the process responsibly.

Proper legal advice and timely action significantly influence the outcome of such proceedings.


Other Life Cycles: 498A IPC Case Lifecycle || Maintenance Case u/s 125 CrPC Lifecycle. Index of all life cycles is here.


Key Contributor:
Mrs Suprajaa Rajan B.Com, LL.B., LL.M.
+91-9606345150

Posted in Legal Procedure | Tagged Hindu Marriage Act HM Act 9 - Restitution of conjugal right Life Cycles of Various case types Matrimonial dispute Matrimonial law Matrimonial Litigation India RCR coverted into Divorce | Leave a comment

Rina Kumari Vs Dinesh Kumar Mahto and Anr on 10 Jan 2025

Posted on October 5, 2025 by ShadesOfKnife

A division bench of Supreme Court held that mere passing of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights at the husband’s behest and non-compliance therewith by the wife would not, by itself, be sufficient to attract the disqualification under Section 125(4) Cr.P.C.


Solution is to use same evidence in maintenance case also, that was used in RCR proceedings and win the maintenance case. Simple…
The judiciary (could!) just delayed the inevitable. That’s all.


From Paras 29 and 30,

29. Thus, the preponderance of judicial thought weighs in favour of upholding the wife’s right to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and the mere passing of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights at the husband’s behest and non-compliance therewith by the wife would not, by itself, be sufficient to attract the disqualification under Section 125(4) Cr.P.C. It would depend on the facts of the individual case and it would have to be decided, on the strength of the material and evidence available, whether the wife still had valid and sufficient reason to refuse to live with her husband, despite such a decree. There can be no hard and fast rule in this regard and it must invariably depend on the distinctive facts and circumstances obtaining in each particular case. In any event, a decree for restitution of conjugal rights secured by a husband coupled with non-compliance therewith by the wife would not be determinative straightaway either of her right to maintenance or the applicability of the disqualification under Section 125(4) Cr.P.C.
30. Another contention that was urged before us is that the findings in the judgment for restitution of conjugal rights by the Family Court, being a Civil Court, would be binding on the Court seized of the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C, as they are to be treated as criminal proceedings. This specious argument needs mention only to be rejected outright. No doubt, in Shanti Kumar Panda vs. Shakuntala Devi20, this Court held that a decision by a Criminal Court would not bind the Civil Court while a decision by the Civil Court would bind the Criminal Court. However, maintenance proceedings are essentially civil in nature and the reason for inclusion of the provisions dealing therewith in the Code of Criminal Procedure was clarified by the Law Commission of India in September, 1969. Significantly, as long back as in the year 1963, in Mst. Jagir Kaur and another vs. Jaswant Singh21, a 3-Judge Bench of this Court held that proceedings under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, the precursor to Section 125 Cr.P.C., are in the nature of civil proceedings; the remedy, being a summary one; and the person seeking that remedy, ordinarily being a helpless person. Therefore, even if non-compliance with an order for payment of maintenance entails penal consequences, as may other decrees of a Civil Court, such proceedings would not qualify as or become criminal proceedings. Nomenclature of maintenance proceedings initiated under the Code of Criminal Procedure, as those provisions find place therein, cannot be held to be conclusive as to the nature of such proceedings.

 

Rina Kumari Vs Dinesh Kumar Mahto and Anr on 10 Jan 2025

Index of HMA judgments is here. Index of Maintenance Judgments is here.

Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision HM Act 9 - Restitution of conjugal right Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes Reportable Judgement or Order Rina Kumari Vs Dinesh Kumar Mahto and Anr | Leave a comment

Saroj Rani Vs Sudarshan Kumar Chadha on 8 Aug 1984

Posted on May 22, 2024 by ShadesOfKnife

A division bench of the Apex Court held that ‘Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (popularly called as Restitution of Conjugal Rights case) is not violative of Articles 14 and 21 (right to privacy)‘.

 

Saroj Rani Vs Sudarshan Kumar Chadha on 8 Aug 1984
Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision Article 14 - Equality before law Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty Constitutional Validity HM Act 9 - Restitution of conjugal right Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes Not Authentic copy hence to be replaced Reportable Judgement or Order Saroj Rani Vs Sudarshan Kumar Chadha | Leave a comment

Search within entire Content of “Shades of Knife”

My Legal X Timeline

Advocate Sandeep Pamarati ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ’ช๐Ÿ‘จ๐Ÿปโ€๐ŸŽ“ Follow

AP High Court Advocate with M Tech (CS) || 12 years in 'Software Industry' as Solution Architect || Blogs at https://t.co/29CB9BzK4w || #TDPTwitter

SandeepPamarati
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ’ช๐Ÿ‘จ๐Ÿปโ€๐ŸŽ“ Retweeted
delhipolice Delhi Police @delhipolice ·
26 Jul

โš ๏ธ FACT CHECK: FAKE VIDEO โš ๏ธThe viral video claiming Delhi Police DCP Sumit Jha resigned over student protests is completely fake and AI generated. The authentic footage, in which the officer addresses the public regarding active misinformation campaigns, is available vide link

Reply on Twitter 2081352316767396053 Retweet on Twitter 2081352316767396053 597 Like on Twitter 2081352316767396053 2294 X 2081352316767396053
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ’ช๐Ÿ‘จ๐Ÿปโ€๐ŸŽ“ Retweeted
itdp_official iTDP Official @itdp_official ·
31 Jul

Zero Airports..

Zero Vision..

Zero @ysjagan..

The numbers speak louder than the slogans.

#YSRCPNeverAgain #UttarandhraKalalakuRekkalu
#BhogapuramAirport

Reply on Twitter 2083105701380198733 Retweet on Twitter 2083105701380198733 102 Like on Twitter 2083105701380198733 379 X 2083105701380198733
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ’ช๐Ÿ‘จ๐Ÿปโ€๐ŸŽ“ Retweeted
renuka_jetti RENUKA.JETTI.LL.B. @renuka_jetti ·
1 Aug

เฐเฐ‚ เฐšเฑ†เฐชเฑเฐชเฐพเฐฐเฑ เฐธเฐพเฐฐเฑ #YCP paytm เฐ•เฐฟ เฐšเฑ†เฐชเฑเฐชเฑ เฐคเฑ‹ เฐ•เฑŠเฐŸเฑเฐŸเฐฟเฐจเฐŸเฑเฐŸเฑ ๐Ÿ‘
#YcpCriminalPolitics
#EndOfYCP
#HOPEJETTI

Reply on Twitter 2083419566785646723 Retweet on Twitter 2083419566785646723 39 Like on Twitter 2083419566785646723 110 X 2083419566785646723
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ’ช๐Ÿ‘จ๐Ÿปโ€๐ŸŽ“ Retweeted
yashtdp_ Yash @yashtdp_ ·
1 Aug

เฐฎเฐพเฐœเฑ€ เฐฎเฑเฐ–เฑเฐฏเฐฎเฐ‚เฐคเฑเฐฐเฐฟ เฐถเฑเฐฐเฑ€ เฐœเฐ—เฐจเฑ เฐฐเฑ†เฐกเฑเฐกเฐฟ เฐ—เฐพเฐฐเฑ‚,

เฐคเฐพเฐœเฐพเฐ—เฐพ เฐตเฐšเฑเฐšเฐฟเฐจ เฐตเฐพเฐฐเฑเฐค "เฐ…เฐชเฑเฐชเฐฒเฐฐเฐพเฐœเฑ เฐฌเฑ†เฐฏเฐฟเฐฒเฑ เฐชเฐฟเฐŸเฑ€เฐทเฐจเฑ เฐ•เฑŠเฐŸเฑเฐŸเฐฟเฐตเฑ‡เฐค!" เฐšเฑ‚เฐถเฐพเฐ• เฐ†เฐฏเฐจ เฐตเฐฏเฐธเฑ เฐคเฑ†เฐฒเฑเฐธเฑเฐ•เฑ‹เฐ•เฑเฐ‚เฐกเฐพ เฐฎเฑ€เฐ•เฑ เฐธเฑเฐ•เฑเฐฐเฐฟเฐชเฑเฐŸเฑ เฐตเฑเฐฐเฐพเฐธเฐฟ เฐ‡เฐšเฑเฐšเฐฟเฐจ เฐตเฐพเฐกเฐฟเฐจเฐฟ เฐคเฐฟเฐŸเฑเฐŸเฑเฐ•เฑเฐ‚เฐŸเฑ‚.. เฐฆเฐฏเฐšเฑ‡เฐธเฐฟ เฐฎเฑ€ เฐฎเฑ†เฐŸเฑเฐŸเฑเฐคเฑ‹ เฐฎเฑ€เฐฐเฑ เฐ•เฑŠเฐŸเฑเฐŸเฑเฐ•เฑ‹เฐ•เฐ‚เฐกเฐฟ!

"45 เฐเฐณเฑเฐฒเฑ.. เฐ‡เฐ‚เฐšเฑเฐฎเฐฟเฐ‚เฐšเฑ เฐตเฐฏเฐธเฐฏเฐฟเฐชเฑ‹เฐฏเฐฟเฐ‚เฐฆเฐฟเฐฒเฑ‡, เฐ†เฐฏเฐจ เฐŽเฐตเฐฐเฑ‹ เฐฆเฐพเฐฐเฐฟเฐจเฐชเฑ‹เฐฏเฑ‡

Reply on Twitter 2083378805889278044 Retweet on Twitter 2083378805889278044 17 Like on Twitter 2083378805889278044 59 X 2083378805889278044
Load More

Recent Posts

  • Ishwar Chand Sharma and Ors Vs State of U.P. on 29 May 2026 July 26, 2026
  • Prabhakar Yeshwant Masram and Anr Vs Sou Tula Namdeorao Jaipurkar and Anr on 21 Jul 2026 July 26, 2026
  • Shikha Lall Vs Prince Agarwal on 7 Nov 2024 July 21, 2026
  • Pranjal Poddar and Ors Vs Shivani Gupta on 21 Apr 2026 July 21, 2026
  • Sharad Kumar Pandey Vs Mamta Pandey on 1 Sep 2010 July 21, 2026

Most Read Posts

  • Reply to Section 41A CrPC Notice โ€“ Format with Legal Explanation (5,141 views)
  • Charge Sheet and Final Report Explained (3,159 views)
  • Regular Bail Application Format (Section 437/439 CrPC) (2,538 views)
  • Arrest Procedure in 498A cases after Arnesh Kumar (2,141 views)
  • Discharge Application Format in 498A Case โ€“ Draft, Procedure & Sample Template (2,076 views)
  • Can You Travel Abroad After an FIR Is Registered? โ€“ Legal Position Explained (2,043 views)
  • Life Cycle of a Perjury Case (2,020 views)
  • Application for Certified Copy of FIR โ€“ Format, Procedure and Sample Draft (1,762 views)
  • Appeal, Revision and Review Explained (1,732 views)
  • Life Cycle Stages of a Restitution of Conjugal Rights Case (1,695 views)

Tags

Reportable Judgement or Order (439)2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision (424)Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes (387)Landmark Case (384)1-Judge Bench Decision (370)Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to (298)Work-In-Progress Article (215)3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision (101)Sandeep Pamarati (91)Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty (80)Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed (71)Perjury Under Section 340 CrPC (70)Absurd Or After Thought Or Baseless Or False Or General Or Inherently Improbable Or Improved Or UnSpecific Or Omnibus Or Vague Allegations (62)Reprimands or Setbacks to YCP Govt of Andhra Pradesh (49)Summary Post (47)CrPC 482 - Quash (44)CrPC 125 or BNSS 144 - Order for Maintenance of Wives Children and Parents (43)HM Act Sec 13 - Divorce Granted to Husband (42)Abuse Or Misuse of Process of Court (42)Divorce Granted on Cruelty ground (42)

Categories

Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification (760)Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments (329)High Court of Andhra Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (187)High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification (167)High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification (112)High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification (95)Legal Procedure (83)High Court of Madras Judgment or Order or Notification (71)High Court of Allahabad Judgment or Order or Notification (63)LLB Study Material (59)General Study Material (56)High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification (53)Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications (51)High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification (47)Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) (47)Prakasam DV Cases (46)District or Sessions or Magistrate Court Judgment or Order or Notification (44)High Court of Madhya Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (38)High Court of Gujarat Judgment or Order or Notification (28)High Court of Telangana Judgment or Order or Notification (28)

Recent Comments

  • vinod gupta on Reply to Section 41A CrPC Notice โ€“ Format with Legal Explanation
  • eCourts India on Compromise-Based Quashing in Matrimonial Cases โ€“ Complete Legal Strategy
  • The Divorce Law Firm on Life Cycle Stages of a Divorce case
  • The Divorce Law Firm on Life Cycle Stages of a Divorce case
  • ShadesOfKnife on Sandeep Pamarati Vs Ungrateful Knife (IPC 498A Case)

Archives of SoK

  • July 2026 (19)
  • June 2026 (19)
  • May 2026 (24)
  • April 2026 (33)
  • March 2026 (42)
  • February 2026 (30)
  • January 2026 (21)
  • December 2025 (2)
  • November 2025 (3)
  • October 2025 (17)
  • September 2025 (12)
  • August 2025 (5)
  • July 2025 (10)
  • June 2025 (15)
  • May 2025 (3)
  • April 2025 (10)
  • March 2025 (7)
  • February 2025 (8)
  • January 2025 (1)
  • December 2024 (3)
  • November 2024 (4)
  • October 2024 (16)
  • September 2024 (15)
  • August 2024 (14)
  • July 2024 (11)
  • June 2024 (18)
  • May 2024 (13)
  • April 2024 (9)
  • March 2024 (23)
  • February 2024 (15)
  • January 2024 (11)
  • December 2023 (11)
  • November 2023 (9)
  • October 2023 (13)
  • September 2023 (12)
  • August 2023 (15)
  • July 2023 (17)
  • June 2023 (11)
  • May 2023 (6)
  • April 2023 (5)
  • March 2023 (10)
  • February 2023 (9)
  • January 2023 (12)
  • December 2022 (12)
  • November 2022 (8)
  • October 2022 (13)
  • September 2022 (17)
  • August 2022 (10)
  • July 2022 (21)
  • June 2022 (27)
  • May 2022 (23)
  • April 2022 (32)
  • March 2022 (17)
  • February 2022 (6)
  • January 2022 (2)
  • December 2021 (7)
  • November 2021 (7)
  • October 2021 (6)
  • September 2021 (10)
  • August 2021 (31)
  • July 2021 (45)
  • June 2021 (17)
  • May 2021 (17)
  • April 2021 (18)
  • March 2021 (58)
  • February 2021 (14)
  • January 2021 (50)
  • December 2020 (35)
  • November 2020 (68)
  • October 2020 (67)
  • September 2020 (28)
  • August 2020 (41)
  • July 2020 (20)
  • June 2020 (36)
  • May 2020 (40)
  • April 2020 (38)
  • March 2020 (26)
  • February 2020 (43)
  • January 2020 (35)
  • December 2019 (34)
  • November 2019 (4)
  • October 2019 (18)
  • September 2019 (57)
  • August 2019 (33)
  • July 2019 (12)
  • June 2019 (18)
  • May 2019 (5)
  • April 2019 (19)
  • March 2019 (58)
  • February 2019 (11)
  • January 2019 (90)
  • December 2018 (97)
  • November 2018 (43)
  • October 2018 (31)
  • September 2018 (73)
  • August 2018 (47)
  • July 2018 (143)
  • June 2018 (92)
  • May 2018 (97)
  • April 2018 (59)
  • March 2018 (8)

Blogroll

  • Daaman Promoting Harmony 0
  • Fight against Legal Terrorism Fight against Legal Terrorism along with MyNation Foundation 0
  • Good Morning Good Morning News 0
  • Insaaf India Insaaf Awareness Movement 0
  • MyNation Hope Foundation Wiki 0
  • MyNation.net Equality, Justice and Harmony 0
  • Sarvepalli Legal 0
  • Save Indian Family Save Indian Family Movement 0
  • SIF Chandigarh SIF Chandigarh 0
  • The Male Factor The Male Factor 0
  • Unitedmen Foundation a dedicated community forged with the mission to unite men facing legal challenges in marital disputes. 0
  • Vaastav Foundation The Social Reality 0
  • Vinayak my2centsworth – This blog is for honest law abiding men, married or planning to get married 0
  • Voice4india Indian Laws, Non-profits, Environment 0
  • Writing Law Writing Law by Ankur 0

RSS Cloudflare Status

  • EWR (Newark) on 2026-09-02 September 2, 2026
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Sep 2, 05:00 - 09:00 UTC Jul 21, 15:30 UTC Scheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in EWR (Newark) datacenter on 2026-09-02 between 05:00 and 09:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window […]
    Cloudflare

RSS List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot

  • 103.89.15.35 | SD August 2, 2026
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 207 | First: 2019-03-02 | Last: 2026-08-02
Owned and Operated by Advocate Sandeep Pamarati and Advocate Suprajaa Rajan
Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Flint by Star Verte LLC

Bad Behavior has blocked 488 access attempts in the last 7 days.

pixel