Back
2017 Supreme(UK) 300
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Rajiv Sharma, Sharad Kumar Sharma, JJ.
Smt. Anju Bhatia - Appellant
Versus
Vivek Bhatia - Respondent
First Appeal Nos. 82, 80 & 83 of 2015
Decided On : 21-09-2017
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Siddhartha Singh
For the Respondent: Mr. Neeraj Garg
The court's decision highlights the importance of considering the mental health of a spouse when determining cruelty in a divorce proceeding. The court recognized that the wife's borderline personality disorder significantly impacted her behavior and caused distress to the husband and his family. The court also emphasized the importance of the child's welfare in determining custody, considering the tender age of the child and the importance of the mother's love and affection.
Headnote:
HINDU MARRIAGE ACT - SECTION 13 - CRUELTY - SECTION 26 - CUSTODY OF CHILD - SECTION 9 - RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS - WIFE SUFFERING FROM BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER - HUSBAND FILED FOR DIVORCE ON GROUND OF CRUELTY - WIFE FILED COUNTERCLAIM FOR RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS - TRIAL COURT GRANTED DIVORCE AND DISMISSED COUNTERCLAIM - BOTH PARTIES APPEALED - HELD, DIVORCE DECREE UPHELD - WIFE'S BEHAVIOR CONSTITUTED CRUELTY - CUSTODY OF CHILD GRANTED TO WIFE - RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS DENIED.
Fact of the Case:
The husband filed for divorce on the ground of cruelty, alleging that the wife suffered from borderline personality disorder and exhibited unpredictable and aggressive behavior, causing mental distress to him and his family. The wife denied the allegations and claimed that the husband had deserted her. She filed a counterclaim for restitution of conjugal rights, seeking to restore their marital relationship. The trial court granted the divorce and dismissed the counterclaim.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the wife's behavior, including unpredictable mood swings, outbursts of anger, and threats of suicide, constituted cruelty towards the husband. The court also considered the wife's admission that she had written a suicide note, which caused fear and distress to the husband and his family. The court held that the husband had established the ground of cruelty under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the wife's behavior constituted cruelty towards the husband, warranting a divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act? 2. Whether the custody of the child should be granted to the husband or the wife? 3. Whether the wife's counterclaim for restitution of conjugal rights should be allowed?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the wife's behavior, including unpredictable mood swings, outbursts of anger, and threats of suicide, constituted cruelty towards the husband. The court considered the wife's admission that she had written a suicide note, which caused fear and distress to the husband and his family. The court also considered the medical reports and expert testimony, which confirmed that the wife suffered from borderline personality disorder, a condition that could lead to unpredictable and aggressive behavior. 2. The court held that the custody of the child should be granted to the wife, considering the tender age of the child and the importance of the mother's love and affection for the child's development. The court also considered the fact that the wife's condition could be managed with proper treatment and support. 3. The court held that the wife's counterclaim for restitution of conjugal rights should be dismissed. The court found that the wife's behavior had caused irreparable damage to the marriage and that forcing the husband to continue the marriage would be unjust and oppressive.
Final Decision: The court upheld the divorce decree granted by the trial court and dismissed the wife's appeal. The court also dismissed the wife's counterclaim for restitution of conjugal rights. The custody of the child was granted to the wife.
Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
For the purposes of brevity, the Appeal No.82/2015 is taken up as the leading case.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the appellant/husband and respondent/wife was solemnized on 6.5.2011 at Dehradun (hereinafter since there being two appeals which has been preferred by the wife and one by husband, they are being referred as husband and wife).
3. The marriage thus held on 06.05.2011 was registered with the Registrar of Marriage at Dehradun. At the time of marriage the husband was working as an Engineer in Jet Airways, Mumbai where after the marriage the wife joined the husband and they lived together for 2 years and discharged their matrimonial obligations as husband and wife.
4. After the marriage and as a consequence of the same a son named Riyarth was born on 12.2.2012, who at the time of filing of the suit was of 14 months of age and was living with the respondent/wife. The respondent/wife used to be too atrocious and often she was in the habit of misbehaving with the appellant/husband. According to the appellant/husband his case was that the respondent/wife used abusive language and the environment in the home was so acrimonious that it became gradually difficult to endure the company of the wife, the reasons for which would follow hereinafter.
5. The husband and wife went to Vaishno Devi along with wife and after their return, they had gone to celebrate the 25th Anniversary of his uncle to Jaipur. While returning, the husband and wife had to travel back to Dehradun by bus, this also created a trouble for him when the wife created a scene at the bus station itself alleging thereof that she is not in the habit of travelling by bus and she had humiliated the husband in public and thereafter they had gone to Mumbai.
6. Respondent/wife, her sister Garima and her cousin brother all had visited the husband’s home at Mumbai and all of them had gone together to Lonawala. For the reasons known, the wife suddenly started reacting rudely at Lonawala and started abusing the husband for no justified reason. The husband’s case was that the behavior of the wife was unpredictable as she used to create scenes, which was too humiliating for him and it was not one or two incidents which has happened, this continued to be so on number of other occasions.
7. Not even this, she used to carry the family issues on the road and whenever she lost her tamper she used to go on the road create scene and she even used abusive language for the parents by shouting slogans on the road and thereby humiliating the family members before the public at large. The husband’s case was further that thereafter he had to take number of hours to pacify the wife and to make her understand to come back to home. It was a case of the husband that she had at times alleged ^vc rqEgkjk dke gks x;k gS rks vc rqe D;kas esjk /;ku j[kksxs eSa jaMh gaw eq>s NksM+ nksA*
8. The husband’s case was further that the attitude of the wife was so acrimonious and humiliating that she used to send messages to the husband by saying that whenever he will go to the office she will sleep with the neighbors and she used to pressurize the husband to give her divorce as she wanted to live separately.
9. Not only this, often the wife used to be so unpredictable that she used to lock herself in her room or in the bathroom and used to threaten that she will consume phenyl or she will cut her veins and commit suicide and thereby entrap the husband and entire family members in a criminal cases.
10. It is the case of the husband that when in last week of July, 2011, when the husband’s parents visited Mumbai the respondent/wife quarreled with them and misbehaved and when the parents of the husband tried to make her understand and to pacify the disputes and requested her to behave properly as they are equivalent to her mother and father, she used to further aggravate the issue and used to misbehave with them and when the husband tried to ask her to behave
