SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Telangana) 50

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD 
K.LAKSHMAN, B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, JJ. 
XXXXX - Appellant 
Versus
XXXXX - Respondent
Family Court Appeal No.21 of 2015 
Decided On : 30-01-2026

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : G VENKATESWARLU
For the Respondent: A V NARAYANA RAO

Allegations of cruelty in divorce proceedings must be substantiated with evidence; mere claims without supporting documentation or witness testimony are insufficient for a divorce decree.

Headnote:(A) Family Law - Divorce - Grounds for Divorce - Cruelty - Allegations of mental cruelty must be supported by cogent evidence; mere allegations without supporting witnesses or documents are insufficient. Neither the Family Court nor the High Court can grant a decree of divorce based solely on allegations, as established in various judgements including Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh and Naveen Kohli v. Neelu Kohli. (Paras 16, 18, 20, 21)

Facts of the case:
The appellant-husband filed for divorce, alleging that his wife displayed abnormal behavior and cruelty after their arranged marriage, which took place on 11.02.2001. The marriage lasted till 2009 during which they had one son. The respondent denied all allegations, claiming the appellant was neglectful and abusive. (Paras 3-5)

Findings of Court:
The Family Court dismissed the petition for divorce due to lack of evidence substantiating claims of cruelty and abnormal behavior by the respondent, emphasizing the need for substantial proof in such cases. The court found no errors in the Family Court’s final order. (Paras 8, 22)

Issues: The primary issue revolved around whether the appellant proved allegations of cruelty and if the continued irretrievable breakdown of marriage justified granting a divorce. (Paras 16-17)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that allegations of cruelty must be backed by evidence, emphasizing that cruelty is subjective, varying according to individual experiences and circumstances, and highlighted the significance of ensuring a fair assessment rather than merely relying on accusations. (Paras 16-20)

Result: Appeal dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Table of Content
1. allegations of cruelty and respondent's behavior (Para 3 , 4 , 9 , 10 , 12)
2. respondent's defense against allegations (Para 5 , 13)
3. failure to prove allegations of cruelty (Para 8 , 15 , 21 , 22)
4. legal definition and consideration of cruelty (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
5. conclusion of appeal dismissal (Para 23)

JUDGMENT:

K.Lakshman, J.

1. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant and the respondent. We have perused the record.

2. This appeal is filed challenging the order dated 07.05.2014 in FCOP No.674 of 2012 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, at Secunderabad.

3. The appellant is the husband, and the respondent is the wife. The marriage of the appellant with the respondent was performed on 11.02.2001 as per Hindu rites and customs. It is an arranged marriage. They lived and lead their marital life happily till 2009. They were blessed with a male boy. The appellant was working as an agent in an automobile shop and was drawing a handsome salary. Out of his income, he purchased all household articles and also bought gold and silver for the respondent as per her wishes. At the respondent’s request, the appellant accepted her proposal to join a job as a school teacher. However, thereafter, there was a change in the attitude of the respondent. She started neglecting both their son and the appellant. The respondent used to shout at their son without any reason and began avoiding the appellant by refusing to acknowledge their presence at home. Whenever the appellant questioned her attitude, she would quarrel with him over petty issues without any justification. The respondent failed to look after household work and even stopped cooking and caring for the well-being of their son. The respondent left the matrimonial home from 14.05.2012 to 30.05.2012 without informing the appellant. When questioned, the respondent adamantly stated that she had gone for training from her school.

4. Despite repeated requests made by the appellant, the respondent did not change her behavior. She exhibited abnormal conduct such as shouting in a high pitch, uttering meaningless words, and causing self-injury. Even when the appellant, on the advice of elders, approached the respondent to resume cohabitation, she refused and instead started cursing him. The appellant was mentally exhausted due to the respondent’s conduct and was no longer in a position to live in constant fear.

5. Respondent filed counter denying the said allegations. It is alleged that the appellant was running an automobile business as an owner and earning handsome amounts. He never spent any money for his family. The respondent was residing in Working Women’s hostel. Since the appellant was not at all paying her any maintenance, as such, respondent started earning for herself to meet her regular needs right from the date of marriage. Appellant used to lock her inside a room on and off and tried to forcibly restrain her from going to school. Appellant used to shout at her by ordering her to remain silent and keep her mouth shut. Appellant never showed any love towards respondent and their son and he was always interested in other activities and threatening the respondent with dire consequences if she reveal the incidents occurred in the home to anyone. The appellant was never a dutiful husband towards respondent and nor responsible father towards their son. He always tried to poison their child’s mind by telling him all kinds of bad things about the respondent. She filed O.S.No.251 of 2012 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, at Nuzvid of Kirshna District, when the appellant and his family members tried to sell away the joint family property, i.e., land admeasuring Acs.10.06 guntas at Cheemala Padu Village of Krishna District and got interim orders restraining appellant and his mother from alienating the said property. The appellant filed the present petition suppressing the real facts seeking divorce even prior to their separation. The ap

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top