Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BIREN VAISHNAV, DEVAN M.DESAI
Rashmi W/o Ketankumar Engineer @ Rashmi Dhirubhai Vaghela – Appellant
Versus
Ketankumar Karsanbhai Engineer – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. marriage context and preceding applications. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding mala fide intentions and child custody. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. assessment of evidence for divorce petition. (Para 6 , 9) |
| 4. statutory ground for divorce under hindu marriage act. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. dismissal of appeal and consequence for civil applications. (Para 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT :
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
1. This Appeal has been filed by the wife-appellant challenging the judgment and decree dated 29.06.2011 passed by the learned Family Court No.4, Ahmedabad. By the aforesaid judgment and Order, the Family Court allowed the Family Suit No.604 of 2004 filed by the respondent-husband preferred under Section 13(1-A)(ii) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
2. Heard Ms.Falguni Trivedi, learned counsel for the wife-appellant and Dr.Tapan Trivedi, learned counsel for the respondent-husband.
3. Brief facts narrated in the appeal are as under:-
3.1 The parties to this appeal got married on 11.10.1990. It appears that both parties filed applications for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955. The application filed by husband was numbered
The statutory provision allows for divorce if no restitution of conjugal rights occurs for over a year post-decree, validating the grounds for divorce.
Normal marital disagreements and the presence of in-laws do not constitute mental cruelty sufficient for divorce. The petitioner did not provide adequate evidence to support claims.
The court affirmed that substantiated evidence is crucial for claims of cruelty or adultery in marital disputes, ruling that unjustified abandonment entitled the wife to restitution of conjugal right....
Lack of cohabitation post-restitution decree adjudges eligibility for divorce under S.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Court ruled that repeated cruelty constitutes valid grounds against restitution of conjugal rights.
Only District Courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate restitution of conjugal rights under the Hindu Marriage Act.
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
