JUDGMENT - N.J. PANDYA, J.:---The appellant is the husband who had filed M.J. Petition No. 327 of 1996 initially in the City Civil Court at Bombay which later on came to be transferred to the Family Court at Bandra. He had sought divorce on 2 grounds, one was that his consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud and second was that of cruelty. The learned trial Judge by judgment dated 7th December 1993 (sic) had disbelieved the ground of fraud completely and so far as the ground of cruelty is concerned, the decision was against the husband. As a result, the petition came to be dismissed.

2. We have referred to the aforesaid two grounds with a view to emphasise that in the appeal, the ground of fraud is not pressed. The appeal is argued only on the ground of cruelty.

3. We are taken through the position of the petitioner husband at page 48, and the letter of respondent wife at page 55 and her witnesses.

4. The husband has tried to make out a case of cruelty on 3 instances:

(i) that the wife had taken pills and thus had tried to commit suicide;

(ii) she was in the habit of consuming liquor; and

(iii) she has not made any attempts whatsoever to resume cohabitation.

5. As it has come on record, it is quite obvious that in a city like Mumbai, like most of the members of public the said couple was also feeling the pinch of shortage of accommodation. In one room along with parents, the petitioner and the respondent were staying at Khar.

6. Some arrangement was worked out with the help of a friendly Doctor and for sleeping at night, they were permitted to make use of the dispensary.

7. During the said arrangement once according to husband, he found the respondent wife having become unconscious in the said dispensary and when she came to consciousness, she told that she had taken pills. She also indicated that she does not want to live. This is first said by the husband in the course of his examination in chief at page 49.

8. However, when the wife was in the witness box nothing has been asked to her about this incident. On the contrary it is her say that she was beaten by her mother in law and as she was not well, the Doctor was called on the next date at 10 a.m. No questions have been put to her in the cross examination suggesting that she had become unconscious because of taking pills.

9. So far the consumption of liquor is concerned, it appears to be a very wild allegation. In any case nothing is suggested to her during the cross examination. In this background, if no attempts are allegedly made, the question to be considered is whether it could have been made at all. The entire testimony of the husband as that of the wife clearly indicate that the parents of the husband, more particularly, mother did not like the wife. There were constant arguments leading to physical violence also where wife was the victim.

10. After considering all these aspects, when the trial Court has dismissed his case of cruelty, we do not see any reason to interfere with the same.

11. The learned Advocate for the appellant had cited four different decisions of this Court as also Supreme Court. The decision of the Full Bench of this Court rendered at Nagpur in the matter of (Dr. Keshaorao Krishnaji Londhe v. Mrs. Nisha Londhe)1, reported in A.I.R. 1984 Bom. 413; The learned Judges have categorically stated that the concept of cruelty has undergone change and if conduct of the parties is such as would make it impossible for the petitioner to live with the respondent, the case of cruelty should be accepted.

12. Except for the passage of time starting with the year 1996, when the petition was filed, till date the parties have not resided together. We have nothing before us to suggest that till the filing of the petition or till the recording of evidence, the circumstances were such as would make us to come to a conclusion that the petitioner husband cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent.

13. No doubt, no attempts said to have been made in f

Click Here to Read the rest of this document