SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Bom) 361

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
A.S. CHANDURKAR, G.A. SANAP, JJ.
Danesh Madhukarrao Pahade – Appellant
Versus
Smita Danesh Pahade – Respondent
Family Court Appeal No. 95 of 2014
Decided On : 14-01-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mrs. Padma M. Chandekar.
For the Respondent: Mr. U.M. Aurangabadkar.

Headnote:

Family Courts Act, 1984 - Section 19 - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) and (iii), 23, 23 (1) (b), 13(1)(iii) - Family Court Appeal - Divorce - Petition, filed by appellant against respondent for divorce on grounds of cruelty, desertion and mental disorder due to schizophrenia as provided under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) and (iii) respectively of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Whether appellant proves that respondent behaved in cruel manner with him and deserted him without any reasonable cause - Whether appellant proves that respondent is suffering from incurable mental illness and therefore, it is not possible for appellant to cohabit with respondent - Whether judgment and decree passed by learned Judge of Family Court is sustainable – Held, In Court view, admissions given by appellant in his cross examination would speak volumes about real state of affairs - In backdrop of evidence on record, this ground also cannot be accepted - Judge of Family Court has recorded reasons for disbelieving case of appellant - On a fresh appreciation and analysis of material, Court are of opinion that there is no reason to interfere with well reasoned judgment and decree passed by family Court - In Court view, therefore, law laid down in case (supra), relied upon by learned Advocate for respondent squarely apply to facts of this case - In view of proved facts, law laid down in case (supra) relied upon by learned Advocate for appellant cannot be made applicable to facts of this case - In view of this position, Court conclude that there is no substance in appeal - Family Court Appeal stands dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

G.A. SANAP, J.

1. In this appeal, filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenge is to the judgment and decree dated 07.11.2008, passed by the learned Judge of the Family Court No. 2, Nagpur, whereby the learned Judge of the Family Court dismissed the petition, filed by the appellant against the respondent for divorce on the grounds of cruelty, desertion and mental disorder due to schizophrenia as provided under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) and (iii) respectively of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

2. The facts leading to this appeal are as follows:

    The marriage between the appellant and respondent took place on 04.02.1991. After marriage, the respondent came to reside at the house of the appellant. The couple was blessed with a daughter by name Swaroopa on 06.08.1992. It is the case of the appellant that since beginning the respondent never acted or behaved normally. The respondent displayed the significant traits of mental imbalance resulting into unpleasant instances of violent nature. The respondent used to continuously quarrel with the appellant and his family members. The conduct and behaviour of the respondent disturbed the peaceful atmosphere in the family of the appellant. It is the case of the appellant that gradually the respondent agreed that she was suffering from mental illness. She was initially treated by their family Doctor Mr. Kishor Gojalwar. On the advice of the family doctor she was treated by psychiatrist Dr. Sudhir Bhave. Dr. Sudhir Bhave opined that the respondent was suffering from depression. He prescribed the medicines. The respondent took medicines for some time, but later on declined to go to the Dr. Bhave and stopped taking medicines.

3. On 18.06.1994, the respondent was taken to Dr. Bhave and treated by him. Dr. Bhave on examination opined that the respondent was suffering from Schizophrenia. Doctor prescribed the medicines. There was no improvement in the behavior of the respondent. She suffered repeated attacks and became violent. On one such occasion the respondent had slapped their daughter Swaroopa. The daughter Swaroopa became unconscious. There was bleeding from her mouth. The respondent used to misbehave and mentally torture the appellant. She used to pull his hair and collar. She used to pick quarrel with all family members. The conduct and behavior of the respondent gradually became violent. She had been to the office of the appellant. She misbehaved with him. She created a scene. She dragged the appellant out of his office. There was no improvement in her conduct and behavior. On one occasion, they had been to Aurangabad to attend the naming ceremony of son of Rohini Pahade. The respondent created a scene at Aurangabad, as well. She quarreled with the appellant and went into the bedroom and locked the door from inside. The appellant realizing the seriousness banged the door and hardly could get entry into the room. He was shocked to see that respondent was eating “Good Night Mosquito Mat.” The conduct of the respondent displayed suicidal tendency as a result of mental sickness.

4. In the year 1995, the respondent went to the house of her parents and was residing there. The daughter was staying with the appellant. According to the appellant, the respondent behaved in cruel manner with him and his family members. According to the appellant, the respondent deserted him for a period of more than two years without any reasonable cause before filling the petition. The respondent is suffering from incurable mental illness. It is the case of the appellant that, it is not possible for him to continue his future married life with the respondent. On the above grounds, he prayed for divorce.

5. The respondent filed written statement and opposed the claim. The respondent denied the material allegations made by the appellant. According to the respondent, she was ill-treated and tortured at her matrimonial home by the appellant and his family members. The respondent was driven out of th

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top