IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sujit Narayan Prasad, Arun Kumar Rai, JJ.
Smt. Champa Kumari @ Sampa - Appellant
Versus
Saheb Mahakud, son of Sri Ushakar Mahakud - Respondent
F.A. No.142 of 2024
Decided On : 05-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. husband claims cruelty by wife's demands, quarrels. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. family court grants divorce on cruelty ground. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. wife contends trial court ignored her evidence. (Para 19) |
| 4. husband defends cruelty proof sufficiency. (Para 20) |
| 5. conflicting witness testimonies on mutual cruelty. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 6. documents support respective cruelty claims. (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 7. perversity from ignoring or misappreciating evidence. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 8. cruelty requires grave, contextual mental harm. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50) |
| 9. lower court abruptly concluded cruelty without analysis. (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 10. judgment perverse lacking evidence appreciation. (Para 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66) |
| 11. appeal allowed; decree quashed for perversity. (Para 67 , 68 , 69) |
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The instant appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant under Section19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the order/judgment dated 30.03.2024 [decree signed on 08.04.2024] passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Seraikella-Kharsawan, in Original Suit No. 54 of 2021, whereby and whereunder, the said Suit filed by the respondent- husbandwas allowed on contest but without cost, holding that marriage of the petitioner (respondent herein)Saheb Mahakud with the respondent Smt. Champa Kumari (Appellant herein) solemnized on 28.4.2019 is hereby dissolved.
2. The brief facts of the case, which required to be enumerated, needs to be referred as under:
3. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 28.04.2019as per Hindu rites and customs at the parent’s house of the respondent(appellant herein) and the parties started residing together at the house of the petitioner (respondent herein).
4. It is stated that marriage was solemnized without any demand of dowry and after consummation of marriage, soon after it was realized by the petitioner/respondent/husband that respondent/appellant wife is not very much interested in staying in her matrimonial home but to stay at her parent’s house to lead a luxurious life and for this reason her behaviour became very rude with the petitioner and his family members and even refused to cohabit.
5. Further she started making fight and quarrel, abusing entire family members with filthy languages and the respondent/wife in order to pressurize regularly insists the applicant to take a house on rent at Baridih in Jamshedpur and even after efforts to convinced the respondent about his inability to arrange a house on rent due to his meager income as driver of an auto, the respondent did not agree and continued her irrational behaviour and sometimes used to hit her head on wall with intend to injure and putting blame upon the applicant and his family members with threatening to implicate in false criminal cases.
6. This fact has also been stated that considering the aforesaid conduct of the respondent the petitioner made a written complaint to Mukhiya and Gram Pradhan of village Bara Sijulata on 04.09.19 where mother and relative of the respondent came and in the panchayati respondent assured not to repeat her previous behaviour but went to her maike with her parents and returned after 3 months on several requests of the petitioner but again her similar conduct and behaviour continued.
7. It has further been stated that on 14.10.2020 again a panchayati was held in presence of members of both the sides and again even after assurance given by respondent/wife, she after coming from her maike did not amend her behaviour. On 16.01.2020 respondent/wife again made quarrel for arranging rented house at Jamshedpur near her parents house but on refusal she called her parents and went to Rajnagar P.S. giving threatening lodged complaint against applicant and his family members and on her complain they were calle
Arulvelu and Anr. vs. State [Represented by the Public Prosecutor] and Anr.
Dr. N.G. Dastane vs. Mrs. S. Dastana
V. Bhagat vs. D. Bhagat (Mrs.)
Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate v. Neela Vijay Kumar Bhate
Joydeep Majumdar v. Bharti Jaiswal Majumdar
Vishwanath Agrawal v. Sarla Vishwanath Agrawal
Registrar v. Uday Singh s/o Ganpatrao Naik Nimbalkar and Others [
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....
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....
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.
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....
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.
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....
Husband failed to prove cruelty or desertion in divorce suit; unproved illicit relationship allegation itself constitutes cruelty to wife; appellate court upholds trial findings absent perversity, re....
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....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.