Back
2009 Supreme(UK) 191
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Prafulla C. Pant, B.S. Verma, J.
Gautam Chaddha …. Appellant.
Versus
Smt. Richa Chaddha….Respondent.
First Appeal No. 88 of 2007
Decided on : 04-23-2009
Mr. L.P. Naithani, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant.
Ms. Prabha Noliyal, Advocate, for the respondent.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that evidence of cruelty by one spouse can lead to the grant of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, even if the acts of cruelty were not condoned.
Headnote:
Cruelty - Divorce - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13, Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1984, Section 28 - 13, 19, 28
Fact of the Case:
The respondent filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alleging cruelty, harassment for dowry, and adultery by the husband. The trial court found in favor of the respondent and granted the divorce. The appellant challenged the judgment.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court found that the respondent was treated with cruelty by her husband and granted the divorce. The appellant's contention that there was no finding on the point of cruelty was dismissed by the court.
Issues: The issues framed by the trial court were whether the defendant treated the plaintiff with cruelty, whether the plaintiff is entitled to any relief claimed by her against the defendant, and to what relief, if any, the plaintiff is entitled.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the wife's pregnancies after the alleged acts of cruelty did not indicate condonation of the cruelty. The court also found that the wife's false First Information Report against the husband and his parents was not proven. The court affirmed the decree of divorce based on the evidence of cruelty by the husband.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the decree of divorce passed by the trial court was affirmed.
This appeal, preferred under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1984, read with Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is directed against the judgment and order dated 10.09.2007, passed by Additional Judge, Family Court, Rishikesh, District Dehradun, in Suit No. 02 of 2004, whereby the petition for divorce, filed by the respondent, has been allowed and marriage between the parties has been dissolved.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the Lower Court Record.
3. Brief facts of the case are that respondent-Richa Chaddha got married to appellant-Gautam Chaddha on 13.12.1999, in accordance with Hindu Rites, at Delhi. Twins, namely, Sana Chaddha and Sparsh Chaddha, born out of the wedlock on 25.01.2002. Since 20th October 2003, the parties are living separately from each other. The respondent filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alleging that she has been treated with cruelty by her husband. She has further pleaded that she was harassed for demand of dowry. She has further pleaded that her husband Gautam Chaddha (present appellant) is living in adultery. The details of cruelty are also pleaded date-wise in the petition, alleging that the husband insulted the wife by hurling abuses at her. It is also alleged that the respondent was assaulted by the appellant. It is further pleaded by the respondent that conditions were made intolerable by the appellant after delivery of twins, as he was more violent thereafter. It is also alleged that on 08.08.2003, the appellant attempted to strangulate the respondent. It is also stated by respondent in her petition that she lodged First Information Report relating to harassment for no fulfillment of demand of dowry against her husband and in-laws, in which in-laws were arrested and released on bail. With the petition for divorce, the respondent also made prayer for alimony and custody of children, and return of the articles given in marriage.
4. The petition was contested by the husband (present appellant) and written statement was filed by him before the trial court, in which marriage between the parties is admitted. Birth of twins is also admitted. However, all allegations made against husband (present appellant) were denied by him. It is pleaded by the husband that it was the respondent (wife) who treated the appellant with cruelty. It is further pleaded that the husband made every effort to make his wife happy in the matrimonial house. It is further stated that he deposited money amounting Rs.6,25,000/- in the joint accounts of the parties, including Fixed Deposit Receipt of Rs.5,00,000/- in favour of the respondent. The allegations, relating to demand of dowry are specifically denied and it is alleged that a false case was lodged by the wife. It is further pleaded that appellant neither treated the respondent with cruelty nor he lived adulterous life. He has stated that he took his wife to Europe. It is also stated that he took every care of the children born out of the wedlock. It is also stated that respondent has shown inhumane behaviour by leaving the kids in the house of the husband, who are still living with him. It is further stated that for the sake of children, the appellant made every effort for reconciliation, but failed. It is alleged that the respondent is a woman of free and luxurious life. It is further stated that all the articles given in marriage were kept by the wife in the locker provided to her, which she operates, as such, there is nothing to be returned to her. It is also stated that the respondent (wife) is a earning member and not entitled to any alimony from the husband, as he is maintaining the children also. (5) On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed following issues:-
(i) Whether the defendant treated the plaintiff with cruelty?
(ii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any relief claimed by her against the defendant?
(iii) To what relief, if any, the plaintiff is entitled?
