Cruelty, either mental or physical, can justify a decree of divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act if it causes suffering that prevents a spouse from continuing together.

ORDER :

1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-wife, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 27.07.2022 (Annexure A/1), passed by the Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, District Durg (C.G.) in Civil Suit No. 720/2016, whereby the Trial Court granted a decree of divorce in favor of the respondent, pursuant to the application filed under Section 13(1)(i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

2. In this case, it is an admitted fact that after the marriage was solemnized as per Hindu customs on 20.04.1978 in village Manjan, Tehsil Manuganj, District Rewa, Madhya Pradesh, the parties lived their marital life by staying at the non-applicant's workplace, village Kapsi, District Kanker. The children of the applicant and the non-applicant are Manoj Kumar, Preeti and Roshni. On 05.12.1995, when the non-applicant got a job in Bhilai Steel Plant, both the parties started living together in Bhilai.

3. It is also an admitted fact that the applicant receives a maintenance amount of Rs. 4,500 deducted from the non-applicant's salary. The non-applicant married his daughter, Preeti, on 1 December 2014. The applicant's son, Manoj, married an intercaste woman in 2015 and is living separately from his wife. The non-applicant and her daughter, Roshni, have filed a MJC No. 890/2016 for maintenance against the applicant.

4. Facts of the present case, in brevity, is that the The non-applicant filed an application under Section 13(1)(i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking a decree of divorce from the appellant-wife. It is averred that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 20.04.1978 at Village Manjan, Tahsil Mauganj, District Rewa (M.P.), according to Hindu rites and rituals. Following the marriage, the appellant joined the respondent at his workplace in Village Kapsi, District Kanker (C.G.), where she fulfilled her matrimonial obligations.

5. The parties were blessed with three children: two daughters and one son, namely Manoj, Preeti, and Roshni. Subsequently, on 05.12.1995, when the respondent secured employment at Bhilai Steel Plant, the family shifted residence to Sector-5, Bhilai. It is an admitted fact that the elder daughter was duly married and moved to her matrimonial home, and the son also solemnized his marriage in 2015. At present, the younger daughter, Roshni, resides with the appellant.

6. The appellant alleges that the non-applicant subjected her to physical cruelty and habitual verbal abuse. She contends that, as a result of ongoing ill-treatment and denial of basic necessities including food and other essential household items, she approached the mediation center at Bhilai Steel Plant for relief.

7. Consequent thereto, the department directed the respondent to pay maintenance to the appellant at the rate of Rs. 4,500/- per month. Despite this, after the house was allotted in the name of the non-applicant, he constructed an additional room and confined the appellant therein, further withholding maintenance and proper sustenance. Aggrieved, the appellant initiated a maintenance proceeding against the respondent, which was eventually withdrawn upon compromise.

8. Additionally, the respondent filed a false complaint against the appellant at Police Station Bhilai Bhatti, registered as Crime No. 626/2016, which is prima facie a bailable offense. Despite these hardships, the appellant attempted to sustain the matrimonial relationship. The Family Court, upon framing two issues—whether cruelty was inflicted by the respondent and whether the period of desertion had elapsed—heard both parties and subsequently passed the judgment and de