IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Goutam Bhaduri, N.K. Chandravanshi, JJ.
Shailendra Kumar Chandra, S/o. Shri Babulal Chandra - Appellant
Vs.
Smt. Bharti Chandra W/o. Shailendra Kumar Chandra - Respondent
First Appeal (M) No. 124 of 2017
Decided On : 27-04-2022
Hindu Marriage Act - Section 9 - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 155 - Hindu Marriage Act - Section 13(1)(i-a) - Demand of dowry - Decree of divorce – Cruelty – Appellant-husband pleaded that he was married to respondent-wife family life went fine for only about 3 months - Respondent-wife started quarreling over small things and then without his consent, she used to go to her parental house with his father - After making various efforts, she returned - She said that she did not want to live along with his parents - She also said that if he wanted to live with her, then he has to live with her parents they will lodge dowry case against him - Again without his consent - She went to her parental house along with her father - Appellant-husband went her parental house along with some reputed persons of their society to bring her back, but she did not return - Appellant-husband filed application against the respondent-wife under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act in Family Court was culminated on the compromise - Respondent-wife did not live with him - Appellant-husband was coming along with respondent wife by train preplanned way, she got off train at Raipur on pretext of treatment and went along with her father from there, by assuring him that she will return Mother of appellant husband was ill - respondent-wife, then he misbehaved him and also said to live along with them, otherwise, they will send him to jail in dowry case - Even on being noticed thrice by their social forum, they refused to take the notice - Conduct of respondent-wife, appellant-husband is suffering from physical and mental cruelty - Since 8-4- respondent-wife has deserted the appellant-husband without any reason - Despite all possible efforts made by them - Held, Desirable culture for a Hindu son in India to get separated from parents upon getting married at the instance of wife, especially when son is the only earning member in family - Son, brought up and given education by his parents, has a moral and legal obligation to take care and maintain parents, when they become old and when they have either no income or have a meagre income - Generally people do not subscribe to western thought, where, upon getting married or attaining majority, son gets separated from family - Wife is expected to be with the family of the husband after marriage - She becomes integral to and forms part of family of husband and normally without any justifiable strong reason, she would never insist that her husband should get separated from the family and live only with her – Court do not find any justifiable reason, except monetary consideration of the respondent wife. In our opinion, normally, no husband would tolerate this and no son would like to be separated from his old parents and other family members, who are also dependent upon his income - Persistent effort of respondent wife to constrain appellant to be separated from the family would be tortuous for husband and in our opinion - Family Court was highly unjustified in observation - Family Court has taken the role of a councilor rather than an adjudicator while doing so - Role of court is to adjudicate the issue involved in the case based on the evidence after duly appreciating it - Family Court is not supposed to advice the remedies to parties or dispose of the case on the probabilities of leading happy marital life in future - appeal stands allowed.
JUDGMENT :
N.K. Chandravanshi, J.
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 21-2-2017 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Korba (CG) in Civil Suit No. 57-A/2014, whereby the application filed by the appellant-husband for grant of decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty was rejected.
2. The appellant-husband pleaded that he was married to the respondent-wife on 18-6-2011. Their family life went fine for only about 3 months. Thereafter, the respondent-wife started quarreling over small things and then without his consent, she used to go to her parental house with his father. After making various efforts, she returned. She said that she did not want to live along with his parents at Korba. She also said that if he wanted to live with her, then he has to live with her parents at Sakti, otherwise, they will lodge dowry case against him. On 25-3-2012, again without his consent, she went to her parental house along with her father. Appellant-husband went her parental house along with some reputed persons of their society to bring her back, but she did not return. Since, they frequently used to threat him to implicate in dowry case, the appellant-husband submitted application to the Collector and police officials in this regard. Even the appellant-husband filed application against the respondent-wife under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the Family Court, Korba, which was culminated on the compromise. Despite that, respondent-wife did not live with him. On 21-3-2013, when the appellant-husband was coming from Tutikorin (TN) along with respondent wife by train, on 22-3-2013, in a preplanned way, she got off the train at Raipur on the pretext of treatment and went along with her father from there, by assuring him that she will return to Korba. Since mother of the appellant husband was ill, hence on 11-4-2013 he asked his father-in-law to send respondent-wife, then he misbehaved him and also said to live at Shakti along with them, otherwise, they will send him to jail in dowry case. Even on being noticed thrice by their social forum, they refused to take the notice. Due to such conduct of respondent-wife, the appellant-husband is suffering from physical and mental cruelty. Since 8-4-2013, the respondent-wife has deserted the appellant-husband without any reason. Despite all possible efforts made by them, possibility to maintain their marital life has come to an end due to aforesaid physical and mental cruelty and desertion by respondent-wife. In view of above, a decree of divorce was prayed for.
3. In her reply, the respondent-wife denied all the allegations levelled by appellant-husband, stating therein that neither she nor her father has threatened in any way to the appellant-husband to live with her parents, nor they have said that, otherwise they would send him behind the bar, nor she has committed any type of torture as alleged in the application filed by the appellant-husband. Rather, after about 2 months of their marriage, she was subjected to cruelty on demand of car and jewelery. Even the appellant- husband used to assault her. Due to cruelty meted out to her, she got ill, despite that, they did not provide her treatment. She does not want to break her relation with her husband, and therefore, she has not lodged any complaint against him, but the appellant-husband himself does not want to maintain marital relation, therefore, he has lodged various false and fabricated complaints before police and other authorities. It is further contended that after compromise in the case under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, father of respondent-wife had gone to drop her to her matrimonial house on 23-11-2012, but the appellant assaulted her, saying that he had not made compromise to keep her with him, but he did so only to create documents for his defence in Court. Even in Tutikorin, the appellant and her parents abused her and tortured her physically and mentally. On being asked by the appellant himself, her father
Vishwanath Agrawal versus Sarla Vishwanath Agrawal (2012) 7 SCC 288
Persistent pressure from a spouse to separate from family constitutes mental cruelty justifying divorce.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the concept of mental cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the consideration of irretrievable b....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that specific instances of cruelty must be proven, and reckless, false, and defamatory allegations constitute mental cruelty.
Family court divorce decree on cruelty ground set aside as perverse for failing to scrutinize counter-allegations and evidence properly; appellate re-appreciation requires preponderance-based reasoni....
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.