Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 11496
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
A. S. Chandra, J
Nalini Mishra v. Surendra Kumar Patel
H.M.A. 677/2017
For the Appellant/Petitioner: [Appellant's Counsel Name]
For the Respondents:[Respondent's Counsel Name]
Established that persistent abusive conduct and unfounded allegations can amount to mental cruelty, warranting divorce under Hindu Marriage Act.
Headnote:(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13(1)(i-a) - Divorce on grounds of cruelty - Appellant's claims of husband seeking divorce found credible; husband established that the appellant's behavior constituted mental and physical cruelty, including false allegations and abusive behavior, which affected his mental well-being - Court held that established patterns of behavior rendering marital life intolerable amount to mental cruelty. (Paras 9, 14, 16)
(B) Cruelty - Defined parameters of mental cruelty as established in previous Supreme Court rulings, providing a framework for evaluating allegations of abusive conduct - Notably, context of accusations made by spouse can compound allegations of cruelty by infringing on spouse's character and reputation, rendering continued cohabitation untenable. (Paras 10-12, 14)
Facts of the case:
The appeal stems from a divorce decree granted on the basis of alleged cruelty, with the husband claiming a pattern of abusive conduct and accusations from the wife that disrupted the marriage and ultimately led to the filing for divorce. The wife's denial of cruelty and counterclaims were also presented.
Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the lower court's judgment, noting the strong evidence of sustained abusive conduct from the wife directed towards the husband, which constituted sufficient grounds for mental cruelty justifying divorce. The family dynamics and accusations brought forth by the wife were chronicled and evaluated against established legal standards.
Issues: Underlying issues involved whether the husband's evidence supported claims of enduring cruelty, particularly mental cruelty as defined by legal precedent.
Ratio Decidendi: The findings underscore that persistent abusive conduct and unfounded allegations can invoke substantial mental distress and are sufficient grounds for divorce as defined within Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, thereby legitimizing the judicial relief sought by the husband.
Result: The appeal fails and is dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of appeal against divorce decree. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. wife's counterarguments against allegations of cruelty. (Para 4 , 7) |
| 3. consideration of evidence regarding cruelty. (Para 5 , 6 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. definition and implications of mental cruelty. (Para 8 , 9 , 14) |
| 5. conclusion affirming lower court's ruling. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
1. Heard.
The instant appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 17.12.2019 passed in H.M.A. 677/2017 by the learned family Court, Raipur, whereby the application filed by the husband seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty was allowed. The present appeal is by the wife.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the husband leveled allegation that the marriage in between the parties solemnized on 31.10.2010 and out of the said wedlock a child was born. Thereafter, with the passage of time, it is alleged that the wife used to spent money as per her own choice and the visit of the husband to his parents was objected and eventually stopped. It is stated whenever he wanted to visit his parents, the wife used to abuse him resulting into stoppage of meeting of the husband with his parents. It was further alleged that without the consent and permission of the husband she went to a place called Belpahad for her business at Mahanadi coalfield for the business of coal shifting and when the husband tried to intervene, he was abused and insulted. The respondent / husband further alleged that the wife used to take away the entire salary of the husband and used to spent in her business and if a query was made about the expenses, it was reciprocated with the abuses. It is alleged that the wife procured 5 vehicles on loan without the consent of the husband and she deliberately stopped to discharge her household responsibilities including taking care of the child. It is stated that even the husband was stopped to attend the marriage of his real brother and the maternal sister of the husband when wanted to visit their place to appear in an examination from outside, the wife alleged illicit relation of the girl with the husband. It was further alleged that the husband is having an illicit relation with an office colleague. In a result, the husband on different occasions made a police report explaining the facts.
3. It is further alleged that at one occasion the wife had surreptitiously stolen away the valuable papers which were kept in the car and the report having been made about such theft, after CCTV footage when it was discovered that the wife had done this, she was arrested in a criminal case. Referring to a particular date, it is stated by the husband that the wife used to abuse and bald allegations were made against the husband and even at a point of time she assaulted the younger sister of the respondent, therefore, on various grounds, the husband sought decree of divorce.
4. The wife in turn in reply contended that she had never misbehaved with the husband and has not committed any cruelty but it was at the behest of the husband after an affair, they entered into a wedlock. She further stated that the husband knowing fully well that she is a widow, the marriage was performed. She further stated that because of the wish and will of the husband, she underwent a surgery to conceive the child and thereafter child was born. It is further stated that after birth of the child, the behaviour of the husband became strange and for the some reason or the other he wanted to separate. Therefore, on false allegations and grounds, the application for divorce was filed.
5. Learned family Court framed issue on the ground that whether the husband was treated with cruelty by wife or not. On behalf of the husband / respondent, two witnesses were examined namely Surendra Kumar Patel i.e. the husband himself as PW - 1 and sister of the wife namely Rohini Mishra (PW - 2). Whereas on behalf of the wife, she examined herself as DW - 1 and one witness Ananda Pathak, another sister. The learned family Court after ev
