Allahbad High Court
DEOKINANDAN
Suresh Kumar Gulati - Appellant
Versus
Suman Gulati - Respondent
Decided On : 03/31/1982
HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 13(1)(IA), 26 - CRUELTY - DESERTION - CUSTODY OF CHILD - INTERPRETATION - APPLICATION - FACTS - HELD - (1) CRUELTY AS A GROUND FOR DIVORCE MUST BE SOME SUCH CONDUCT OF THE RESPONDENT AS GIVES THE PETITIONER A REASONABLE CAUSE OF APPREHENSION OF INJURY TO BODY, MIND OR HEALTH IN THE FUTURE. (2) DESERTION IS NOT THE WITHDRAWAL FROM A PLACE BUT FROM A STATE OF THINGS, FOR WHAT THEY ASK TO ENFORCE IS THE RECOGNITION AND DISCHARGE OF THE COMMON OBLIGATIONS OF THE MARRIED STATE; THE STATE OF THINGS MAY USUALLY BE TERMED, FOR SHORT, "THE HOME". FURTHER, THE PERSON WHO ACTUALLY WITHDRAWS FROM COHABITATION IS NOT NECESSARILY THE DESERTING PARTY. (3) THE FACT THAT THE WIFE IS QUARRELSOME DOES NOT AMOUNT TO CRUELTY UNLESS IT IS SHOWN THAT THE HUSBAND SUFFERED IN BODY, MIND OR HEALTH, IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, ON ACCOUNT OF THE WIFE'S CONDUCT. (4) THE WIFE'S REFUSAL TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH THE HUSBAND DOES NOT AMOUNT TO DESERTION UNLESS IT IS SHOWN THAT SUCH REFUSAL HAS AFFECTED THE HUSBAND'S HEALTH ADVERSELY. (5) THE HUSBAND IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE CUSTODY OF THE CHILD WHERE THE WIFE IS LIVING AWAY FROM HIM DUE TO HIS ILL-TREATMENT.
Fact of the Case:
THE HUSBAND FILED A PETITION FOR DISSOLUTION OF HIS MARRIAGE WITH THE WIFE BY A DECREE OF DIVORCE UNDER SECTION 13 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 AND ALSO FOR THE CUSTODY OF THE ONLY CHILD OF THE MARRIAGE. THE WIFE CONTESTED THE PETITION AND FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CUSTODY OF THE CHILD UNDER SECTION 26 OF THE ACT. THE TRIAL COURT DISMISSED BOTH THE PETITION AND THE APPLICATION. THE HUSBAND APPEALED.
Finding of the Court:
THE COURT HELD THAT CRUELTY AS A GROUND FOR DIVORCE MUST BE SOME SUCH CONDUCT OF THE RESPONDENT AS GIVES THE PETITIONER A REASONABLE CAUSE OF APPREHENSION OF INJURY TO BODY, MIND OR HEALTH IN THE FUTURE. THE COURT FURTHER HELD THAT DESERTION IS NOT THE WITHDRAWAL FROM A PLACE BUT FROM A STATE OF THINGS, AND THAT THE WIFE'S REFUSAL TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH THE HUSBAND DOES NOT AMOUNT TO DESERTION UNLESS IT IS SHOWN THAT SUCH REFUSAL HAS AFFECTED THE HUSBAND'S HEALTH ADVERSELY. THE COURT ALSO HELD THAT THE HUSBAND IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE CUSTODY OF THE CHILD WHERE THE WIFE IS LIVING AWAY FROM HIM DUE TO HIS ILL-TREATMENT.
Issues: 1. WHETHER THE WIFE'S CONDUCT AMOUNTED TO CRUELTY? 2. WHETHER THE WIFE DESERTED THE HUSBAND? 3. WHO IS ENTITLED TO THE CUSTODY OF THE CHILD?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. CRUELTY AS A GROUND FOR DIVORCE MUST BE SOME SUCH CONDUCT OF THE RESPONDENT AS GIVES THE PETITIONER A REASONABLE CAUSE OF APPREHENSION OF INJURY TO BODY, MIND OR HEALTH IN THE FUTURE. 2. DESERTION IS NOT THE WITHDRAWAL FROM A PLACE BUT FROM A STATE OF THINGS, AND THAT THE WIFE'S REFUSAL TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH THE HUSBAND DOES NOT AMOUNT TO DESERTION UNLESS IT IS SHOWN THAT SUCH REFUSAL HAS AFFECTED THE HUSBAND'S HEALTH ADVERSELY. 3. THE HUSBAND IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE CUSTODY OF THE CHILD WHERE THE WIFE IS LIVING AWAY FROM HIM DUE TO HIS ILL-TREATMENT.
Final Decision: THE COURT DISMISSED BOTH THE APPEALS.
2. The parties were married on 22nd Jan., 1967. They lived together for a few years at Allahabad and the child Gitika was born on 1st Oct., 1970. According to the husbands case, as set out in his petition dated 17th Feb., 1976 which was originally for judicial separation, the wife was more inclined to live at her fathers place than at the husbands and even wanted that he should also live at her fathers place. She was very very quarrelsome and always quarrelled with the members of the husbands family. The quarrels became so frequent that the husband had to hire a house in Mohalla Kalyani Devi, but there too the husband had to change his residence a number of times because of the quarrels which the respondent-wife picked up with the neighbours and other tenants of the house. Ultimately, in spite of the best efforts of the husband to make the wife as comfortable as possible, she left his place with all her belongings, that is, ornaments and clothes and other light things and went to her fathers house on 14th Oct., 1971, as originally alleged in the petition, but now amended, to 14th Nov., 1971 with the permission of this Court. It was said that the wife left without the husbands consent and against his wishes and that she had been living at her fathers place without any reasonable cause and had thus deserted the husband since that date, 14th Oct., 1971, now changed to 14th Nov., 1971. By all amendment of the petition allowed by the trial Court, it was further alleged that the "short temper and repeated and constant quarrels of the wife" had caused "immense mental torture" to the husband which amounts to "both physical and mental cruelty" and that desertion had lasted for a continuous period of more than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition and the husband was entitled to have the marriage dissolved by a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion both; and instead of the relief of judicial separation, the relief of dissolution of the marriage by a decree for divorce was claimed,
3. According to the wife she was turned out of the house by the husband after beating, and left at her parents place. She was ill-treated and subjected to violence with the connivance of his parents and sisters as he wanted to marry again. Neither her father nor mother were living and there was no question of her living at her fathers place. It was said that many a time simple and grievous hurt was caused to her by the husbands acts of violence. She never quarrelled either with the husband or with any member of his family. The husband had shifted to Mohalla Kalyani Devi for his own convenience, It was then urged that the husband once beat her so mercilessly as to break her jaw bone and after driving her out of his house had left her in a serious condition at the house of her brothers and had misappropriated and converted to his own use all her money, ornaments and belongings given to her by her parents. Further she was neglected and not maintained and not taken back in spite of requests. She never refused to live with the husband. The date on which she was turned out after being beaten was given as 14th Oct., 1971. It was then added that she is a Member of Raj Yog Satsang Society run by Smt. Raj Gulati in Darbhanga Colony at Allahabad and in the month of Feb., 1976 the husband approached her through Smt. Raj Gulati and offered Rs. 12,000/- by way at settlement to her and Rs. 5,000/for the maintenance of the minor daughter and also brought some ornaments and clothes for being returned to her. The husband wanted her to sign a writing which was
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.