SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Raj) 104

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
AMITAVA ROY & V.K. MATHUR, JJ.

Raj Talreja
Versus
Kavita Talreja
D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1432 of 2004
Decided On: 01/03/2013

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a ground for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Headnote:

HINDU MARRIAGE ACT - SECTION 13 - CRUELTY - DESERTION - IRRETRIEVABLE BREAKDOWN OF MARRIAGE - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION

Fact of the Case:

Husband filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty, desertion, and irretrievable breakdown of marriage. Wife denied allegations and claimed husband deserted her.

Finding of the Court:

Court found no evidence of cruelty or desertion. Court also held that irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a ground for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Issues: Whether the wife's behavior amounted to cruelty? Whether the wife deserted the husband? Whether irretrievable breakdown of marriage is a ground for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act?

Ratio Decidendi: Cruelty must cause reasonable apprehension of harm or injury to the other spouse. Desertion requires living separately without just cause. Irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a ground for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Final Decision: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT

V.K. MATHUR, J.

1. This Civil Misc. Appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 and under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 5-8-2004 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Udaipur in Civil Case No. 56/2000, whereby the petition filed by the appellant husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage has been dismissed.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant husband - Raj Talreja filed a petition on 22-3-2000 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (herein after referred to as the Act of 1955 before the learned Judge, Family Court, Udaipur against the respondent wife - Smt. Kavita Telreja with the averments that their marriage was solemnized on 13-4-1989 at Udaipur as per Hindu rites and they lived together till the year 1997. Their son Sahil was born on 29-1-1990.

3. The petition for dissolution of marriage was filed by the appellant husband on the grounds that after the marriage the respondent wife started quarrelling with his parents, her behaviour was harsh and cruel and she forced the petitioner to live separately from his parents. The petitioner constructed a new house, where they lived from 29-1-1999. The respondent wife used to go out of the home in the car and when enquired, she used to abuse him and also beat their son Sahil if he also wanted to go out with his mother. After shifting to the new house, they lived as husband and wife without any mental and physical relationship. The wife has completely deserted her husband from 1997.

4. The appellant further contended that his relations with his wife were not cordial right from the beginning and the wife was unable to fulfill her matrimonial obligations as there was natural defect in her private parts, which the appellant came to know when their son was born on 29-1-1990. The appellant spent thousand of rupees on the treatment of this disease known as Endrometrosis and if he had knowledge of this disease, he would not have married her. Whenever the appellant wanted to take her wife outside, she used to wear untidy clothes so that he may be mentally tortured.

5. It was also alleged that the respondent-wife compelled her husband to make her partner in the family business and for this reason, she has physically and mentally deserted him for over three years. This attitude of the respondent wife is utmost cruelty to him.

6. It was further contended that the behaviour and attitude of respondent-wife is detrimental to their son Sahil, who is quite talented student and he apprehends his being adversely affected. The respondent-wife used to wear indecent, transparent dress even before servants and her extra-ordinary bold conduct has made him laughing target in the society.

7. It was also cited that in the year 1990 when his father suffered heart attack due to cruel conduct and misbehaviour of the respondent-wife and he went to attend his father, the respondent-wife threatened him on phone that he should immediately return, leaving his father in that condition, else she would commit suicide so that the husband may be jailed.

8. As per petitioner-husband, on 17-3-2000 the respondent-wife pressurized him that he should immediately terminate partnership of his parents from the business firms and add her name instead, threatened suicide and raised intense quarrel. In this manner, on 17-3-2000 the respondent-wife has ended their marital relation for ever. It was also contended that after filing of application for dissolution of marriage, the respondent-wife has lodged many fallacious cases against petitioner husband and his parents.

9. In the reply, the respondent-wife rebutted the allegations of petitioner-husband and stated that their son Sahil is studying in Saint Pauls School, Udaipur under care of his mother. It was also stated that her father has good business of fruits in Delhi while petitioner-husbands father Bhiman Das had small gro



















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top