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) 120

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. LAKSHMAN, VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, JJ.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX - Appellant
Vs.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX - Respondent
Family Court Appeal No.47 of 2016
Decided On : 23-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : S R SANJEEV KUMAR
For the Respondent: R V INDIRA KUMARI

In divorce proceedings, the burden of proof lies with the petitioner to demonstrate cruelty; failure to establish such claims leads to case dismissal. Irretrievable breakdown alone does not suffice for granting divorce.

Headnote:(A) Family Courts Act, 1984 - Section 19 - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13(i)(ia) - Appeal for dissolution of marriage on grounds of cruelty dismissed by trial court - Allegations of mental and physical cruelty by respondent unproven - Examination of evidence revealed insufficient proof of claims regarding cruelty made by the appellant - Respondent sought relief under Domestic Violence Act, no compliance by the appellant noted - Irretrievable breakdown of marriage acknowledged, but not constitutive for divorce alone - Order set aside; marriage dissolved with conditions applied. (Paras 2-27)

(B) Burden of Proof - The petitioner in a divorce case must adequately prove allegations of cruelty, which requires clear and convincing evidence. The failure to do so leads to dismissal of the petition. (Paras 18-20)

Facts of the case:
The appellant filed for divorce citing cruelty, alleging abusive behavior and mental distress caused by the respondent. The respondent countered with accusations of the appellant's infidelity and physical abuse. After a lengthy marital discord lasting 15 years, both sought a resolution but ultimately the mediation was unsuccessful.

Findings of Court:
The court found the appellant had failed to establish the claims of cruelty, and acknowledged the relational breakdown while stating that irretrievable breakdown is not itself a ground for divorce. The court ordered the dissolution of marriage under specific financial conditions.

Issues: Determining the validity of claims of cruelty, the relationship dynamics, and the potential for reconciling the marriage.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant could not meet the burden of proof required to substantiate claims of cruelty necessary for dissolution of marriage under Hindu law, and thus set aside the earlier dismissal by the Family Court, allowing for divorce under announced provisions.

Result: Appeal allowed, marriage dissolved on agreed terms.

Table of Content
1. grounds for divorce under cruelty (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. counterclaims and evidence submitted (Para 6 , 9 , 17)
3. assessment of cruelty and separation (Para 20 , 21)
4. irretrievable breakdown of marriage consideration (Para 24 , 25)
5. final decree of divorce and settlement (Para 27 , 28)

JUDGMENT :

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Lakshman)

Heard Sri S.R.Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.R.V.Indira Kumari, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This appeal is filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 challenging the order dated 14.10.2015 in FCOP No.166 of 2013 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court at Secunderabad. The appellant is the husband, and the respondent is the wife.

3. The appellant filed a petition under Section 13(i) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the respondent seeking dissolution of marriage, on the ground of cruelty.

4. The appellant contended that his marriage with the appellant was performed on 23.05.2010 as per Hindu rites and customs. It is an arranged marriage. The said marriage was consummated. The respondent became pregnant and she got aborted. They lived happily for a period of five months. Thereafter, the respondent started harassing him mentally. She developed suspicion over his character. She used to abuse the appellant and his parents in filthy language and also abused him before his colleagues and friends. She has suicidal tendency. She also developed signs of schizophrenia and behaved negatively towards him. Thus, the respondent subjected the appellant to cruelty. He tolerated her with a fond hope that she may change her behavior. There was no change in her behavior.

5. It is further stated that a panchayat was held on 09.09.2012, she was sent along with her parents with all her belongings. The appellant tried his level best to live with the respondent. He became a victim of mental cruelty in the hands of respondent. He lost his patience and could not concentrate on his work. Thus, the appellant filed the aforesaid OP against the respondent seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.

6. Respondent filed counter denying the said allegations. According to the respondent, her parents gave an amount of Rs.2,70,000/- cash and also presented household articles and furniture etc., at the time of marriage to the appellant. The appellant had an illegal affair with one Preethisagar, his colleague. Her parents held panchayat and elders advised the appellant his family members to mend their ways. There was no change in his behavior. The appellant and his parents used to blackmail her and also beat her blue and black. Due to the said continuous physical harassment, she got aborted. Another panchayat was held. Despite advise of the elders, there was no change in the behavior of the appellant. To get rid of the respondent, to continue his illegal relationship with Preethisagar, the appellant filed the aforesaid OP seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.

7. To prove the cruelty, the appellant got examined himself as P.W.1 and his relative as P.W.2. He filed Ex.A1/marriage card, Ex.A2/marriage photographs, Ex.A3/legal notice dated 13.09.2012, Ex.A4/acknowledgment and Ex.A5/reply notice dated 25.09.2012.

8. To disprove the said cruelty, respondent got examined herself as R.W.1. However, she did not exhibit any documents.

9. On consideration of the said evidence both oral and documentary, vide impugned order dated 14.10.2015, learned Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad, dismissed the said OP holding that the appellant herein failed to plead and prove cruel acts of the respondent. Challenging the said order, the appellant preferred the present appeal.

10. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent, extensively.

11. Perusal of the record and rival contentions of both parties, would reveal that the marriage of the appellant with the respondent was performed on 23.05.2010. It is an arranged marriage and

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