IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that established evidence of infidelity and cruelty justified the granting of a divorce decree, overturning the Family Court's dismissal.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been preferred against the judgment dated 05.08.2022 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg (C.G.) in Civil Suit No. 365/2017.

2. Vide the judgment impugned, the trial Court dismissed the application filed under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the appellant-husband for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce.

3. Brief facts of the case are that marriage of appellant and respondent was solemnized on 28.02.1996 according to Hindu rites, ritual and customs and out of the wedlock they have one daughter namely Amy Tiwari. After sometime of marriage, the appellant went to his work place at Pulgaon as he was working as Drawing Teacher. However, after some time, relation between them started getting worse on account of illicit relation of respondent with one Ajay Gatagat. It was also pleaded that from 1996 to 2005, the respondent-wife made as many as 08 abortions and all the time Ajay Gatagat was present. In the year 2005, appellant-husband made his transfer to Raipur and after assurance by respondent-wife that she would not keep any relation with Ajay Gatagat, he started residing with respondent-wife. It was also submitted in the application that everything went well for few days, thereafter respondent-wife started talking to said Ajay Gagatat about 10 to 15 times a day, and on being objected, the respondent-wife used to got angry. The respondent-wife had hacked the applicant’s mobile and to defame him, she used to chat in his name and send messages to people. The respondent-wife, taking the advantage of her acquaintance with police, used to tap his phone illegally and used to threat him. Lastly, it was averred that there is no relation between the appellant and respondent for last two years. The respondent used to argue over trivial issues, abuse him, leave the house without informing, torture the appellant mentally and physically & had relation with another person, therefore, it was not possible for the appellant to live with respondent. Finally, an application under Section 13(1) of the Act was filed by the appellant on 28.02.1996 for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty.

4. The respondent, in her reply, denied all the allegations and stated that the appellant used to suspect the fidelity for respondent. The appellant has stayed out of town for about 10 years and whenever he used to come house, he physically abused her and even not born the expenses of her 09 abortions. Appellant’s parents are also residing with her. It was also stated in the reply that in the month of January, 2017, the appellant came into contact with one lady namely Taruna Mathur during school’s training programme, with whom the appellant wanted to spend his life. It was also stated that the appellant wanted to spend his life with fun and debauchery & respondent is fork between appellant and Taruna Mathur & the entire conspiracy has been hatched to remove her. The appellant wanted to abandon his son, wife and parents for his own pleasure.

5. The learned Family Court, after examining oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the application of appellant-husband holding that what the appellant has alleged to be cruelty towards him by the respondent are merely the normal wear and tear of marital life which happens in day-to-day life, which cannot be put in the category of cruelty and it has also not been proved that respondent had illicit relationship with any other person and respondent behaved in cruel manner with the appellant. Hence, the present appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Family Court is perverse and not sustainable in law. The learned Court has recorded a perverse finding with respect to fact that the appellant has treated his wife with cruelty. There is apparent error on the face of record, which needs