Back
1980 Supreme(Del) 9
High Court Of Delhi
J.S.SODHI - Appellant
Versus
AMARJIT KAUR - Respondent
First Appeal Order 221 of 1978
Decided On : 01/15/1980
A.B.SAHARIA, G.L.RAVAL, J.N.AGARWAL
A spouse cannot be granted a divorce on the ground of cruelty if their own conduct has contributed to the breakdown of the marriage.
Headnote:
HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 13(1)(I)(A) - CRUELTY - INTERPRETATION - WIFE'S CONDUCT NOT AMOUNTING TO CRUELTY - HUSBAND'S ATTITUDE AND BEHAVIOR TOWARDS WIFE - COURT'S ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION - DIVORCE DENIED.
Fact of the Case:
Husband filed for divorce under Section 13(1)(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alleging cruelty by the wife. The wife denied the allegations and contested the petition. The trial court dismissed the petition, finding that the wife did not treat the husband with cruelty.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the husband's allegations of cruelty were not substantiated by evidence. The court noted that the parties had reconciled after initial conflicts and had two children together. The court also found that the husband had engaged in violent behavior towards the wife and her family, including beating her and locking her in the house. The court concluded that the wife's conduct did not amount to cruelty and that the husband could not take advantage of his own wrong by seeking a divorce.
Issues: 1. Whether the wife's conduct amounted to cruelty under Section 13(1)(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 2. Whether the husband's violent behavior towards the wife and her family constituted cruelty. 3. Whether the husband could be granted a divorce despite his own misconduct.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Cruelty under Section 13(1)(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, requires conduct that is grave and weighty, reaching a certain pitch of severity. It must be such that no reasonable person would tolerate it or consider that the complainant should be called on to endure it. 2. The wife's conduct, including her alleged failure to attend to the husband during his hospitalization, did not reach the level of cruelty required for a divorce. 3. The husband's violent behavior towards the wife and her family, including beating her and locking her in the house, constituted cruelty. 4. The husband could not take advantage of his own wrong by seeking a divorce based on the wife's alleged cruelty.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the husband's appeal and upheld the trial court's decision to deny a divorce.
( 1 ) THIS is a husband s appeal from the order of the Additional District Judge dated September 15, 1978, refusing him a decree of divorce.
( 2 ) THE appellant Sq. Ldr. J. S. Sodhi was married to the respondent Smt. Amarjit Kaur on January 25, 1970 at Delhi, she being 23 and he 31 years of age. They have two daughters born in 1971 and 1976. On February 21, 1977 the husband petitioned for divorce under Section 13 (l) (i) (a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the Act) on the ground that the wife had treated him with cruelty. The judge dismissed the petition. Now there is an appeal to this court.
( 3 ) DURING this period of seven years the husband was stationed at Bareilly, Belgaum and Delhi. The history of this marriage can be thus sketched in three phases. (1) At Bareilly
( 4 ) FROM January to March, 1970, the husband and wife stayed at Bareilly. In March 1970 wife s parents visited Bareilly. The husband took them to the club. They had dinner at Kwality. In the night at about 10 or II p. m. when they returned home there was an unpleasant incident over cooking gas in the matrimonial home. According to ihe wife s version the husband said : "can t your father arrange for gas"? The husband became angry. He ordered the wife and her parents to leave his house at once. As a result the wife and the parents left Bareilly at mid night.
( 5 ) IN April there was reconciliation. The husband and wife lived at Bareilly from 3rd or 4th April 1970 to May, 1970. At this time the wife conceived.
( 6 ) IN June, 1970 the husband and wife returned from Bareilly. The husband went to Belgaum to join his duty. The wife stayed with her parents at Delhi till March, 1971. On February 3, 1971 a daughter was born to her. (2) At Belgaum
( 7 ) THE wife joined the husband at Belgaum ) n March 1971. She brought with her one month old child. They lived together from March 1971 to the first week of July, 1972. In the first week of July 1972 wife s father visited Belgaum and he brought back the wife with him. According to the wife her father and brother arrived in Belgaum. They stayed at a hotel. The father contacted Wing Commander S. K. C. Gupta, Officer-in-charge of the husband. Mr. Gupta asked the father to take away his daughter as there was risk to her life because of the cruel treatment meted out by the husband to the wife. The father requested Mr. Gupta to ask his wife to examine the body of his daughter for injuries received by her at the hands of the husband. Mrs. Gupta found that there were many injuries on the body.
( 8 ) FROM July, 1972 to May, 1975 the wife lived with the parents at Delhi. On February 5, 1973, the wife wrote to the army authorities for maintenance. In July, 1974, a sum of Rs. 340. 00 per month was fixed as maintenance. This was deducted from the husband s salary and regularly remitted to the wife.
( 9 ) ON August 7, 1974, the husband brought a petition for restitution of conjugal rights in Belgaum court. On September 25, 1974, he obtained an ex parte decree. As a result of persuasion of the army authorities the wife joined the husband at Belgaum in May, 1975. Wing Commander Ahluwalia in his letters August 16, and September 16, 1974 addressed to the wife (Rl and R2) advised her to patch up differences and to live together. The wife showed no willingness to join the husband. At last the Wing Commander asked her : "may I know categorically when and on what date you intend joining your husband?" After this letter the wife joined the husband in May, 1975 at Belgaum, as I have said. From May 1975 to October 1976 the parties lived at Belgaum. It was during this period that a second daughter was born to them on February 6, 1976.
( 10 ) IN August 1976 the husband was admitted in the hospital and remained there for two months on sick leave. (3) At Delhi
( 11 ) IN October 1976 the husband was transferred to Delhi. On October 20, 1976, the parties arrived in Delhi. From October 20,1976 till November 3, 1976 the parties lived togeth
