IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Alok Aradhe, Vijaykumar A. Patil , JJ.
Smt. Shwetha @ Shivakumari – Appellant
Versus
Sri. N. Shashi Kiran – Respondent
Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 4290 of 2016 (FC)
Decided On : 29-03-2023
Desertion - Hindu Marriage Act - The court held that the uncontroverted allegations made on behalf of the respondent / husband constituted a ground of desertion under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, leading to the grant of a decree of divorce.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent / husband filed a petition for divorce on the ground of desertion, which was granted by the family court. The appellant / wife did not respond to the notice and did not participate in the proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant / wife had deserted the respondent / husband for a continuous period of two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition, as the uncontroverted allegations made on behalf of the respondent / husband were not rebutted by the appellant / wife.
Issues: The main issue was whether the ground for desertion under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act was duly proved, considering the lack of response and participation from the appellant / wife.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the principle that uncontroverted allegations, when not rebutted, constitute a ground for desertion under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the decree of divorce granted by the family court was upheld.
JUDGMENT
Alok Aradhe J. - This appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family courts Act, 1984 has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 18.09.2016 passed by the Family Court by which petition filed by the respondent / husband under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) has been allowed and the marriage between the parties has been dissolved by a decree of divorce.
2. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the marriage between the parties was performed on 18.06.2010. Thereafter, the parties lived in their matrimonial home and on 09.06.2011, a son was born to the appellant.
3. The respondent / husband filed a petition on or about 29.10.2014 inter alia on the ground that the after five months of marriage, the appellant / wife left the matrimonial home and in para 5 to 8 of the petition, it was pleaded that the parties are living separately for a continuous period of three years immediately preceding the date of presentation of the petition. It was also pleaded that the respondent / husband sent a notice dated 02.09.2014 (Ex.P3) asking the appellant / wife to give consent for divorce. However, the appellant /wife did not respond to the aforesaid notice. Accordingly, a decree of dissolution was sought on the ground of desertion.
4. The appellant / wife admittedly was served with notice of the proceedings and engaged a counsel. However, neither any statement of objection was filed on behalf of the appellant / wife nor any evidence was adduced.
5. The respondent / husband in order to prove the case examined himself and exhibited documents viz., Ex.P1 to Ex.P7. The family court vide judgment dated 18.04.2016 inter alia held that the uncontroverted averments made on behalf of the respondent / husband in the petition as well as in his evidence before the court have not been controverted on behalf of the appellant / wife. It is further held that uncontroverted allegations made on behalf of the respondent / husband constitute a ground of desertion under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Act. Accordingly, the family court granted the decree of divorce. In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant / wife was thrown out of the matrimonial home on 25.07.2014 and thereafter, the appellant lodged a complaint against the respondent. It is further submitted that police also advised the respondent. However, notwithstanding the advise rendered by the police, the respondent /husband did not permit the appellant to join the matrimonial home. It is further submitted that the matter be remitted to the family court and the appellant / wife be granted opportunity to adduce evidence.
7. We have considered the submissions made by Learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the record. Admittedly, the appellant / wife was served with notice of the proceedings and had engaged a counsel. The counsel participated in the proceedings before the family court. However, neither any statement of objections was filed nor any evidence was tendered on behalf of the appellant / wife. It is trite law that if a witness is not subjected to cross examination by the other side, his testimony is deemed to have been accepted. In the absence of any rebuttal of averments made in the petition under Section 13 of the act as well as the fact that the respondent / husband was not subjected to cross -examination, the family court has rightly concluded that the appellant / wife has deserted the respondent / husband for a continuous period of two years immediately preceding the two years of presentation of the petition. The ground for desertion therefore, has duly been proved. The finding recorded by the family court does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference of this court in this appeal.
For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The same fails and is hereby dismissed.
Uncontroverted allegations, when not rebutted, constitute a ground for desertion under the Hindu Marriage Act.
(1) Deemed Acceptance - It is trite law that if a witness is not subjected to cross examination by the other side, his testimony is deemed to have been accepted.(2) Rebuttal of averments - In the abs....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of 'desertion' under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, emphasizing the need to prove factum of ....
A petitioner must provide substantive evidence of desertion for a divorce to be granted; mere absence or disputes does not constitute legally recognized grounds for dissolution.
The Court held that mere separation without proof of animus constitutes insufficient grounds for desertion under Section 13(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Desertion under the Hindu Marriage Act requires clear evidence of intention to abandon the marriage, and unsubstantiated allegations do not suffice to counter claims of desertion.
Desertion as a ground for divorce requires proof of intentional abandonment without consent; the court found constructive desertion by the husband, leading to the quashing of the divorce decree.
Prolonged separation without justification constitutes desertion, sufficient for divorce under family law.
The main legal point established is the grounds for dissolution of marriage under Sec. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, specifically the evidence and interpretation of desertion.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.