The burden of proving cruelty rests with the spouse seeking divorce. An isolated suicide attempt or adverse behavioral reaction caused by the mental agony of spousal neglect does not constitute legal cruelty, particularly when the petitioner fails to substantiate a continuous pattern of harassment.

JUDGMENT :

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

1. The respondent/wife in M.O.P. No. 358 of 2011 has come forward with this Appeal to set aside the decree of divorce dated 25.02.2019.

2. The petitioner/husband in M.O.P. No. 358 of 2011 filed a petition to dissolve the marriage under Sections 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on the ground of cruelty. He stated that the marriage between the couple took place on 14.07.2008 according to Hindu rites and customs in Vanur Taluk. At the time of the marriage, the wife's parents provided 12 sovereigns of gold and some household articles. The couple began their married life in Puducherry. The wife is a graduate in Economics, while the husband studied up to the 8th standard. This disparity became a source of misunderstanding, and she began to harass him. Frequent quarrels ensued, disrupting the husband's life. They had a daughter, Thamizhini, born on 13.10.2009. Subsequently, the husband returned to his native place in Vanur and worked on his father's land. Despite this, he continued to live with tolerance, hoping she would change her act. Although he acted responsibly as a dutiful husband, his wife harassed him and threatened suicide for trivial reasons. She also physically assaulted him and verbally abused him with filthy language. Furthermore, she repeatedly threw the Thali at his face. In March 2010, the wife left the matrimonial home and refused to continue the marriage. Therefore, he filed the petition seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.

3. The wife filed a counter, disputing the husband's allegations, particularly the claim that she harassed him based on her higher educational qualification. She had stated that the husband and his family retained the gold ornaments and articles, causing her mental distress and leading to frequent quarrels. She further claimed that the properties were not returned and due such harassment, she had attempted to commit suicide by consuming sleeping tablets. She also stated that the husband was unemployed and attempted to live off her income, and that she and her child suffered due to his harassment. Therefore, she contested the allegations of cruelty.

4. On the basis of the rival pleadings, the parties were called upon to adduce evidence. During the trial, husband examined as PW1 and marked the following documents: Ex.P1, – marriage invitation of the respondent with the petitioner dated 14.07.2008; Ex.P-2 – birth certificate of their daughter Thamizhini, dated 15.10.2009; Ex.P-3 – copy of transfer certificate of the wife issued by Bharathidasan Government College for Women, Puducherry; Ex.P-4 – xerox copy of driving license of husband dated 07.09.2001; Ex.P-5 – coy of election identity card of the husband dated 06.02.2008; and Ex.P-6 – copy of family ration card of the husband, dated 15.11.2006.

5. On the side of the wife, she examined herself as RW-1 and marked the following documents: Ex.R-1 – complaint given by the wife, issued by the All Women Police Station, Kottakuppam dated 12.10.2011; and Ex.R-2 – complaint given by the wife before the Kottakuppam Police Station, dated 12.10.2011.

6. The Family Court, after considering the evidence placed on record, agreed with the husband's contentions that harassment occurred. Relying on the testimony of both PW-1 and RW-1, the Court held that the wife had attempted to commit suicide and that evidence showed she threw the Thali at her husband's face, which constituted cruelty. Accordingly, a decree for dissoluti