Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY K.AGRAWAL, ARVIND KUMAR VERMA
Udayram Basant, S/o Kirtan Basant – Appellant
Versus
Jyoti, W/o Udayram Basant – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
1. Invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 read with Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act of 1955’), the appellant herein/husband has preferred this appeal calling in question legality, validity and correctness of judgment & decree dated 7-12-2018 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Mahasamund in Civil Suit No.76A/2014, by which the appellant’s/husband’s application claiming decree for dissolution of marriage on the grounds enumerated under Sections 13(1)(ia) & (ib) of the Act of 1955, has been dismissed finding no merit.
2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual backdrop: -
2.1) Marriage of the appellant herein and the respondent herein was solemnized on 29-4-1993 at Talapara, Bilaspur, as per Hindu rites and customs and out of their wedlock, they were blessed with a daughter namely, Rashmi and a son namely, Sandeep. Thereafter, the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife both resided separately from September, 2001 leading to filing of Civil Suit No.24-A/2002 on 3-7-2002 by the husband before the 1st Additional District Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur on
The principle of res judicata applies to matrimonial disputes, preventing re-litigation of previously dismissed claims of cruelty and desertion.
The principle of res judicata does not apply when a subsequent matrimonial case is based on a new cause of action, allowing for the appeal to be upheld.
False allegations and criminal proceedings against a spouse can constitute mental cruelty, affirming grounds for divorce under Hindu Marriage Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to establish a fresh cause of action for seeking divorce, the continuous nature of desertion, and the interconnection between the i....
Cruelty is a sufficient ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, and a finding of cruelty necessitates the granting of a divorce, independent of other grounds such as desertion.
Trivial disputes between spouses do not constitute cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act, and the burden of proof lies on the party alleging such cruelty.
Long separation and absence of cohabitation can constitute cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, warranting a decree of divorce.
A party cannot benefit from their own wrongdoing in divorce proceedings; misconduct bar relief under the relevant sections of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The appeal court found the Family Court's dismissal of divorce due to cruelty and desertion to be perverse, establishing that the husband's behavior justified dissolution of marriage.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
