Key Points: - The trial and appellate courts considered whether consent to marriage was obtained by fraud and whether wife suffered from schizophrenia (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The Supreme Court held that consent was not obtained by fraud and that the wife was not suffering from schizophrenia, affecting nullity/divorce grounds (!) (!) (!) . - The Court analyzed whether husband’s conduct amounted to condonation of cruelty, affecting the grant of judicial separation under Section 10(1)(b) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The judgment discusses the standards for cruelty in matrimonial law, including legal tests established post-1964, and applies them to the facts (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The final result: second appeal dismissed; decree for judicial separation affirmed as not substantiated, and relief denied (!) .

What is the validity of the husband's claim that his consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud?

What is the status of the wife's alleged schizophrenia and its effect on whether the marriage was voidable or the cruelty claim?

What is the proper application of condonation and cruelty in granting or denying judicial separation under the Hindu Marriage Act?