The bench consisting of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Rajendra Kumar while hearing an appeal challenging the grant of divorce on grounds of mental cruelty summarized the the principles for grounds for divorce.
The case in the hand was between a wife (appellant) and husband (respondent). The dispute between the spouses started arising early in their married life, even before their son was born.
The husband ultimately filed a case u/s 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Meerut. The Court decreed the suit by giving a judgement for dissolution of the marriage.
The question before the Allahabad High Court was-
Whether the appeal filed by the appellant challenging the judgment passed by the Family Court could be accepted or not?
While dealing with the question, the court observed “the word “cruelty” has not been defined in the Act, 1955. It has been used in Section 13(i) (i-a) of the Act 1955 in the context of human conduct or behavior in relation to or in respect to matrimonial duties or obligations. It is a course of conduct of one which is adversely affecting the other. The cruelty may be mental or physical. It may be intentional or unintentional. If it is physical, it is a question of fact and degree. If it is mental, the inquiry must begin as to the nature of cruel treatment and then as to the impact of such treatment on the mind of the spouse as to whether it caused reasonable apprehension that it would be harmful or injurious to live with the other. It is a matter of inference to be drawn by considering the nature of the conduct and its effect on the complaining spouse.”
The Court in dealing with the question opined that the main grounds for divorce filed by the husband was “mental cruelty”.
The High Court stated that the instances like those of making false complaints by the wife (appellant) against her husband (respondent) to higher authorities, making allegations against the parents of the respondent, unproved allegation of indulgence of the plaintiff in adultery and damaging their reputation in the society, etc. in no manner leaves a doubt that the Family Court has not committed any illegality in the impugned judgment to hold a commission of mental cruelty by the wife (appellant) to the husband (respondent).
The bench relied upon the case of Mangayakarasi v. M Yuvaraj where the Supreme Court observed that “unsubstantiated allegation of dowry demand or such other allegation made by the wife against the husband and his family members which exposed them to criminal litigation and ultimately it is found that such allegation is unwarranted and without basis and if that act of the wife itself forms the basis for the husband to allege that mental cruelty has been inflicted on him, certainly, in such circumstance, if a petition for dissolution of marriage is filed on that ground and evidence is tendered before the original court to allege mental cruelty it could well be appreciated for the purpose of dissolving the marriage on that ground.”
In the view of above decision, the appeal was dismissed by the High Court.
Case Title: Smt. Gayatri Mohapatra v. Ashit Kumar Panda
Case No.: FIRST APPEAL No. – 20 of 2007
Counsel for the appellant: M.D. Singh Shekhar
Counsel for the respondent: K.M. Mishra
0 Comments