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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 3410

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, P.B.BALAJI, JJ.
P.K.Mukmuthu Sha - Appellant
Versus
P.S.Mohammed Afrin Banu - Respondent
A.S.(MD)No.131 of 2023 and C.M.P.(MD)No.7532 of 2023
Decided On : 22-12-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : M/s.K.Abiya
For the Respondent: M/s.C.Jeya Indira Patel

The dissolution of marriage was justified due to the husband's cruelty and failure to treat both wives equally under Islamic law, affirming the wife's legal rights.

Headnote:(A) Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 - Sections 2(ii), 2(iv), 2(viii)(a)(d) - Challenge to dissolution of marriage - Plaintiff sought dissolution of marriage on grounds of cruelty and unequal treatment post husband's second marriage - Court held that husband failed to maintain first wife and treated both wives unequally, violating Islamic principles - Appeal dismissed, confirming Family Court's decree. (Paras 4, 10.2, 15, 16)

(B) Maintenance and marital obligations - The husband’s failure to maintain the first wife and his actions after initiating divorce proceedings justified the wife’s claim for dissolution and demonstrated cruelty. (Paras 12, 15(a))

Facts of the case:
The husband appealed against the Family Court's decision granting the wife dissolution of marriage on grounds of cruelty and unequal treatment after his second marriage in September 2021 following a period of separation since 2017. (Paras 2, 10.1)

Findings of Court:
Family Court found that the husband had treated the first wife unequally, failed to discharge marital obligations, and confirmed that the dissolution was warranted under Islamic law. (Paras 15, 16)

Issues: Whether the husband's actions constituted cruelty and whether he treated both wives equitably as required by Islamic law. (Paras 4, 10.1)

Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that cruelty and unequal treatment justifies the dissolution of marriage, and emphasized the husband’s obligation to equally treat wives under Islamic law. (Paras 15(b), 16)

Result: Appeal dismissed; judgment of Family Court confirming dissolution of marriage upheld.

Table of Content
1. grounds for dissolution of marriage based on allegations of cruelty and unequal treatment. (Para 2 , 4 , 5)
2. husband's failure to maintain obligations and the effects of his actions on marital duties. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
3. court's rationale for recognizing the wife's claims of cruelty and unequal treatment. (Para 13 , 14)
4. confirmation of the family court's decree. (Para 16)

JUDGMENT :

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

The Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.30 of 2021, dated 24.03.2023 on the file of the Family Court, Tirunelveli.

2. The husband has preferred this appeal against the order of dissolution of marriage passed by the Family Court, Tirunelveli.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as defendant/husband and plaintiff/wife.

4. The wife/plaintiff, the respondent herein, filed a suit under Section 2(ii) (iv)(viii)(a)(d) of Dissolution of MUSLIM MARRIAGES ACT , 1939 for declaration by dissolving the marriage between her and the appellant/defendant which was solemnized on 03.01.2016, on the ground of cruelty and not treating equivalent to the second wife of the husband.

5. The prime allegations in the said plaint are as follows:

5.1. During her pregnancy, the husband and his mother not treated the plaintiff well, and they are behind the jewels given by the parents of the plaintiff. Without considering that the plaintiff is pregnant, the mother of the husband/defendant scolded her for not draping the saree properly, and also the husband has taken photos of the plaintiff and the defendant when they are in-mate position. When the plaintiff/wife went to Chennai to live along with her husband, during September 2016, a child was born to the parties. However, the child died on the next day. On that score, the husband's sister abused the wife by stating that she could solemnize another marriage of the defendant/husband, since the plaintiff/wife has no child.

5.2. Further, during their stay, the father of the defendant insisted that the doors of the bed room should not be closed and the defendant also insisted the plaintiff to eat foods that were allergic to her and as a result she suffered vomiting and headache, further he used to throw the meal plates on the face of the plaintiff by stating that the food prepared by her were not of his liking and he compared her with one Nasima, who is his relative and caused mental cruelty to her. The plaintiff/wife has to look after the house and hence, unable to bear the cruelties of the defendant/husband, the plaintiff came to her parents home and however, the defendant/husband threatened the plaintiff/wife by uttering that if she is not coming back to live with him, he will solemnize another marriage and also could publish photographs taken by him at the time of close intimacy through internet and also caused cruelties to the family members of the wife alleging that he will murder the family members of the wife.

5.3. Unable to maintain herself, the plaintiff filed M.C.No.71 of 2019, which was allowed in her favour and also filed a complaint in D.V.C.No.43 of 2009 to bring back the jewels and household articles, which is kept to be pending at the time of the trial of the above suit. In the meantime, the defendant/husband appears to have filed O.S.No.25 of 2019 for the relief of restitution of conjugal rights and the same was allowed on 04.05.2021 and immediately on 05.09.2021, the defendant/husband married another lady and ill-treated the plaintiff/wife and not treated the plaintiff/wife on par with the second wife. Hence, the suit for dissolution of marriage by wife.

6. The defendant/husband filed written statement denying various averments made therein an interalia contended that the husband had filed O.S.No.25 of 2019 for the relief of restitution of conjugal rights and the same was allowed on 04.05.2021 and as the wife does not comply the said judgment and hence, as per Islamic Law, he had contracted marriage with another woman since th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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