IMPORTANT POINT
The impact of false and defamatory allegations on the reputation and mental well-being of the spouse and family members constitutes cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

JUDGMENT

Suresh Kumar Kait, J. - The present appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been preferred by the appellant-wife against the judgment dated 26.08.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Delhi in HMA No. 561296/2016 petition filed by respondent-husband under Section 13(i) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been allowed and divorce has been granted on the grounds of cruelty.

2. The respondent filed the petition under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce from appellant on the ground of cruelty. The parties got married on 14.05.2011. The respondent husband claimed that he and his family members had welcomed the appellant herein with love, affection and respect. However, her family members frequently visited her and interfered in their day to day life. Accordingly, her behaviour with him and his family members was not co-operative and she misbehaved with them. The respondent alleged that appellant levelled false and frivolous allegations against his father and sister-in-law and used abusive and filthy language with them. She never discharged her matrimonial obligations and threatened to commit suicide and implicate them in the case of murder. The respondent averred that appellant alleged of him having illicit relations with his sister-in-law and refused to make physical relations with him. Consequently, since August, 2012 they did not live as husband and wife. The respondent also alleged that appellant used to frequently live with her parents without his knowledge and used to come back of her own in 10-12 days. That is how appellant left her matrimonial home in August, 2012 and since then she is living with her parents.

3. The stand of appellant in her written statement before the learned Family Court that she was taunted for the marriage ceremony not being performed as per the standard of respondent's family and made dowry demand, even though her parents had spent more than Rs.8,00,000/- in marriage and given Rs.5,00,000/- cash to her husband. The appellant further alleged that respondent used to drink liquor and at the instigation of his sister-in-law (brother's wife) used to beat her and never took care of her emotional feelings and was hostile towards her. She further claimed that she was treated like a maid by respondent, his mother and other family members and that she was subject to cruelty and taunted for dowry demand. The appellant averred that her allegations of respondent having illicit relations with his sister-in-law were true and correct, as they used to lock themselves in a separate bolted room for a long time and for this reason, the respondent left her at her parental home. The appellant contended in her written statement that respondent never took care of her emotional and physical needs and used her as per his wishes and her family members never interfered in their married life.

4. The appellant has averred that in August, 2012 on the occasion of Raksha Bandhan, the respondent took her to her parents house and thereafter, never came back to take her to her matrimonial home. The appellant has alleged that she had objected to respondent's relation with his sister-in-law and, therefore, he left her to her parent's house. Even though her father called her father-in-law to take her back to the matrimonial home, but respondent refused and rather threatened them of dire consequences.

5. The appellant made a complaint on 19.12.2012 to the SHO Mangolpuri, Delhi against physical and mental cruelty to which she was subjected while living with her in-laws, however, no action was taken. On 24.01.2013, the appellant filed a complaint with Crime Against Women Cell against her in laws and FIR No. 879/2013 under Sections 498A/406 IPC was registered at Police Station Mangolpuri, Delhi. She also filed a case under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the respondent and his family members, on 28.11.2013. Thereafter, on 05.05.2014, she pref