The court clarified that ordinary marital disputes do not constitute mental cruelty for divorce, emphasizing substantial evidence is necessary for such claims.

JUDGMENT :

B.P. Routray, J.

1. Heard Mr. H.B. Dash, learned counsel for the wife-Appellant in both the cases and Mr. D. Sahoo, learned counsel for husband – Respondent.

2. These two appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 24^th June, 2017 of learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur passed in C.P. No.314 of 2012 and C.P. No.102 of 2014.

3. The facts of the case in brief are that, the marriage between the parties took place on 24^th June, 2010 and they stayed happily, continued with their conjugal life thereafter. In October, 2012 the husband met with an accident resulting his head injury and he was hospitalized. The wife filed C.P. No.314 of 2012 on 24^th November, 2012 claiming maintenance under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act read with Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Pending adjudication of said proceeding, another proceeding in C.P. No.102 of 2014 was filed by the wife seeking dissolution of marriage and divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) on the ground of cruelty.

4. As per the allegations made by the wife in both the petitions, the husband and her in-law members demanded more dowry subsequently and started torturing her on that ground. It would not be out of place to mention here that a case was registered under Section 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code against the husband as per the F.I.R. presented by the wife in the year 2013, i.e. Ganjam Mahila P.S. Case No.67 dated 6^th June, 2013.

5. As it is seen from record, the wife did not make any serious allegations about torture in her initial petition for maintenance, i.e. C.P. No.314 of 2012, whereas she developed her case in the second proceeding, i.e. C.P. No.102 of 2014. Divorce on the ground of cruelty has been well settled by different pronouncements of Hon’ble Supreme Court. In the case of Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh , (2007) 4 SCC 511 , it is summerised as follows:-

“101. No uniform standard can ever be laid down for guidance, yet we deem it appropriate to enumerate some instances of human behaviour which may be relevant in dealing with the cases of ‘mental cruelty’. The instances indicated in the succeeding paragraphs are only illustrative and not exhaustive;

(i) On consideration of complete matrimonial life of the parties, acute mental pain, agony and suffering as would not make possible for the parties to live with each other could come within the broad parameters of mental cruelty.

(ii) On comprehensive appraisal of the entire matrimonial life of the parties, it becomes abundantly clear that situation is such that the wronged party cannot reasonably be asked to put up with such conduct and continue to live with other party.

(iii) Mere coldness or lack of affection cannot amount to cruelty, frequent rudeness of language, petulance of manner, indifference and neglect may reach such a degree that it makes the married life for the other spouse absolutely intolerable.

(iv) Mental cruelty is a state of mind. The feeling of deep anguish, disappointment, frustration in one spouse caused by the conduct of other for a long time may lead to mental cruelty.

(v) A sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment calculated to torture, discommode or render miserable life of the spouse.

(vi) Sustained unjustifiable conduct and behaviour of one spouse actually affecting physical and mental health of the other spouse. The treatment complained of and the resultant danger or apprehension must be very grave, substantial and weighty.

(vii) Sustained reprehension conduct, studied neglect, indifference or total departure from the normal standard of conjugal kindness causing injury to mental health or deriving sadistic pleasure can also amount to mental cruelty.

(viii) The conduct must be much