Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SUDHIR SINGH, SUKHVINDER KAUR
Sonia – Appellant
Versus
Divesh Khullar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sudhir Singh, J.
Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 16.11.2024 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Ludhiana (for short 'the Family Court'), whereby the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') filed by the respondent-husband was allowed, and the marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty.
2. The aforesaid petition had been filed by the respondent-husband, inter-alia, pleading therein that his marriage with the appellant-wife was solemnized on 22.10.2017 as per Hindu rites. No child was born out of the said wedlock. It was further alleged that after the marriage, the appellant-wife refused to cohabit with the respondent-husband and told that her marriage with him was performed against her wishes. Her behaviour was also not good with the family of the respondent-husband and she used to quarrel with them on petty issues. She would remain busy in chatting and talking on mobile phone with her family members, who used to instigate her against the respondent-husband and his family members. It was further alleged that she had also started raisi
The main legal point established is that prolonged separation, false accusations, and reluctance for sexual relations can constitute cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Point of Law : Once parties have separated and the separation has continued for a sufficient length of time and one of them has presented a petition for divorce, it can well be presumed that marriage....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the grounds of cruelty and desertion, as provided under Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, were proven by the responden....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that specific instances of cruelty must be proven, and reckless, false, and defamatory allegations constitute mental cruelty.
The court held that mental cruelty requires substantial evidence, ruling that the appellant failed to prove allegations of non-consummation and cruelty, affirming the Family Court's ruling.
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
