Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Jhk) 4058
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Sujit Narayan Prasad, Arun Kumar Rai, JJ
Churaman Mahto – Appellant
Versus
Baso Devi – Respondent
F.A. No. 323 of 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ashok Kumar Singh
For the Respondents: Shailendra Jit
For a divorce petition based on cruelty and desertion to succeed, the petitioner must prove conduct amounting to cruelty and an animus deserendi to abandon marriage permanently; failure to provide such evidence justifies dismissal of the petition on appeal.
Headnote:(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13(1)(i-a) and (i-b) - Divorce - Cruelty and Desertion - Appellant failed to prove grounds for divorce - Allegations of cruelty not established against respondent - No concrete evidence produced to establish desertion - Appellate Court's scope in case of alleged perversity - Finding of fact cannot be interfered with if not supported by cogent evidence or based on erroneous consideration of evidence. (Paras 19, 22, 25, 47)
(B) Interpretation of 'Perverse' - A finding is perverse if it ignores relevant material, is not supported by evidence, or defies logic - Appellate Court will not substitute its own view unless the findings of the court below are unsustainable, unreasonable, or against the weight of evidence. (Paras 25, 27)
(C) Legal definition of 'Desertion' - Requires two conditions: (1) factum of separation and (2) animus deserendi (intention to permanently end cohabitation) - Desertion must be without reasonable cause and without the consent of the other spouse - Burden of proof lies on the party seeking divorce. (Paras 35, 37, 39)
Facts of the case:
The appellant husband sought a divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act. The trial court dismissed the suit after considering testimonies from both sides, finding no evidence to support the claims of cruelty or desertion, and noted that the respondent wife was instead subjected to mistreatment. The husband appealed, claiming the judgment was perverse.
Findings of Court:
The appellate court observed that the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence for the alleged grounds of cruelty and desertion. Evidence indicated the respondent wife had been subjected to mistreatment and ousted from the matrimonial home. The court held that without proof of animus deserendi or cruelty by the wife, the grounds for divorce could not be satisfied. The appellate court found no error or perversity in the judgment of the trial court.
Issues: Whether the trial court’s dismissal of the divorce petition on grounds of cruelty and desertion was based on accurate analysis of evidence and whether the judgment suffered from legal perversity.
Ratio Decidendi: A divorce petition based on cruelty and desertion requires clear evidence of the respondent's conduct causing harm and a demonstrated intention to abandon the matrimonial home permanently. In the absence of such evidence and given the presence of contradictory facts regarding mistreatment of the respondent, the dismissal of the petition is justified, as an appellate court will not disturb findings of fact unless they are manifestly perverse or against the weight of evidence.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of case origins, facts, and initial decree. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. appellant contends judgment was perverse and evidences were ignored. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. respondent argues findings are well-founded and supported by facts. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. review of evidence led by parties and issues for determination. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. legal definitions of perversity and matrimonial cruelty. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 6. legal requirements and standards for proving matrimonial desertion. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 7. application of law to facts regarding cruelty and desertion. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 8. final court decision to dismiss the appeal. (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
Prayer
1. The instant appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the order/judgment dated 05th December, 2023 (decree signed on 21.12.2023) passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hazaribagh in Original Suit No. 276 of 2022, whereby and whereunder, the petition filed under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the appellant/petitioner seeking a decree of divorce against his wife, has been dismissed and exemplary cost of Rs.20,000/- has been imposed upon the appellant-husband, which was to be paid by way of DD, in the name of respondent-wife, within one month.
Factual Matrix
2. The brief facts of the case leading to filing of the divorce petition by the appellant/petitioner needs to be referred herein as under:
It is the case that the parties are legally married husband and wife and their marriage was solemnized on 13.03.2001 as per Hindu Rites and Customs at village-Khairatari, P.O. and P.S.-Barkagaon, District-Hazaribagh, within the jurisdiction of the Court. Marriage was not consummated. There is no issue out of wedlock. The parties have been living separately.
It is the further case that the respondent-wife had filed Maintenance Case No.68 of 2007, in which, maintenance was allowed @ Rs.2,000/- per month. The respondent-wife has also lodged dowry-cruelty which has been concluded.
It is the case of the appellant/petitioner that the respondent-wife refused to lead conjugal life in spite of best effort and has deserted him, due to which, he has been undergoing mental depression. Hence, by claiming cause of action etc., the petitioner husband prayed for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion.
After notice, the respondent-wife appeared in the suit on 01.06.2023 but has not filed written statement. She has cross-examined, the P.Ws and also adduced herself as R.W. In course of hearing, she has virtually been contested the case without written statement.
3. It is evident from the factual aspect that the appellant/petitioner had a motion by filing a petition under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion.
4. After taking into consideration the pleading of the parties, the learned Family Court has framed altogether five issues which are as follows:-
(i) Whether the suit as framed is maintainable in its present form?
(ii) Whether the parties are legally married husband-wife?
(iii) Whether the respondent-wife treated the petitioner-husband with cruelty after marriage?
(iv) Whether the respondent-wife deserted the petitioner-husband?
(v) Whether the petitioner-husband is entitled for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion or any other relief/reliefs?
5. The evidences have been led on behalf of both the parties. Thereafter, vide order dated 05.12.2023, the judgment has been passed dismissing the suit by holding that none of the ground either of cruelty or desertion has been established by the appellant/petitioner, which is the subject matter of the present appeal.
Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner:
6. It has been contended on behalf of
