Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Vishwanath Prakash – Appellant
Versus
Jayanti Kumari – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ARUN KUMAR RAI, J.
1. The instant appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant/plaintiff under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the order/judgment dated 14.03.2023 [decree signed on 17.03.2023] passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Lohardaga in Original Suit No. 39 of 2022, whereby and whereunder, the said Suit filed by the appellant-husband under the provisions of Sections 27(1)(d) of Special Marriage Act, 1954 has been dismissed.
2. The brief facts of the case as pleaded in the plaint having been recorded by the learned Family Judge, needs to be referred herein as:
(i) The marriage of the appellant/plaintiff Vishwanath Prakash was solemnized with defendant on 11.12.2007 at the office of District Marriage Registrar, Ranchi. After marriage, respondent came to her matrimonial house and started residing with her husband. Out of said wedlock, one son, namely, Om Prakash was born on 16.12.2008.
(ii) It is alleged that after few months of marriage, the behaviour and attitude of the respondent became very cruel and arrogant as she neither took care of household work nor of her in-laws or husband. A panchayti was held in the village in year 201
Allegations of cruelty in divorce cases must be substantiated by consistent and credible evidence; normal marital conflicts do not constitute legal cruelty.
Divorce on cruelty ground requires proof of grave, sustained conduct causing mental agony on preponderance of probabilities; mere counter-complaints, non-appearance, and non-compliance with ex-parte ....
The court found that allegations of cruelty must be substantiated with corroborative evidence, and in this case, the appellant failed to prove such claims, leading to the dismissal of the divorce sui....
Family court divorce decree on cruelty ground set aside as perverse for failing to scrutinize counter-allegations and evidence properly; appellate re-appreciation requires preponderance-based reasoni....
To establish grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, the conduct must amount to grave and weighty cruelty, which impacts the ability to continue marital life; ordinary disputes do not suffi....
Husband's unproven allegations of wife's religious insistence, cohabitation refusal, and separate living demand do not constitute cruelty; his rebuff of her reconciliation efforts bars divorce as own....
Mental cruelty, as defined under Hindu Marriage Act, can irreparably damage the trust and respect in marriage, providing sufficient grounds for divorce even without physical violence.
The court found that the allegations of adultery were unproven, while cruelty based on behavior was insufficiently substantiated; the judgment was thus overturned for lack of adequate evidence.
The court affirmed that the evidence of persistent cruelty justified the dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, establishing a clear breakdown of the marital relat....
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
