##PAGE1## ##PAGE2##

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN)

The parties, who were college mates, eventually saw their association blossom into a matrimonial relationship at Mangalore. Thereafter, the parties travelled beyond the shores of the nation to the United Kingdom. Out of the said wedlock, they were blessed with two girl children. Unfortunately, what had blossomed as a relationship between the parties turned sour on foreign soil, giving rise to serious disputes and differences between them. The ensuing discord eventually brought the parties back to India and the matrimonial dispute, accompanied by a volley of allegations and counter-allegations, has now come before us for consideration.

##PAGE3##

The present appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2026 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, D.K., Mangaluru, in M.C.No.81/2022 (‘the Family Court’ for brevity) whereby the petition filed by the petitioner-wife under Section 13(1)(i-a) and Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘the Act’ for short), came to be allowed and the marriage solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent was dissolved by a decree of divorce and the counter-claim filed by the respondent-husband seeking restitution of conjugal rights was dismissed with costs.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court.

3. Briefly stated the facts are that, the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 23.05.2011 at Gopalakrishna Sabha Bhavan at Shakthi Nagar, Mangaluru and the parties have two daughters. The wife sought dissolution of marriage on the ground of ‘cruelty’ under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Act and permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Act, while the husband resisted the petition and sought restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Act.

##PAGE4##

4. It is the case of the petitioner-wife that though the marriage was initially cordial, the respondent-husband gradually subjected her to both physical and mental cruelty. According to her, the respondent was controlling in his behaviour, objected to her professional career and higher education, frequently quarrelled with her, physically assaulted her on several occasions and behaved in an abusive manner towards her and her parents. She further alleged that the respondent was hostile towards her parents, particularly during her pregnancies so also after the birth of the children and did not permit her to freely visit or maintain contact with her parental family. She relied substantially upon the WhatsApp conversations exchanged between the parties to demonstrate the nature and extent of the matrimonial discord.

##PAGE5##

4.1. It was further contended that the respondent repeatedly made allegations that the petitioner was suffering from mental illness and even relied upon such allegations in the proceedings relating to custody of the children. The petitioner maintained that these allegations were false, stigmatic and unsupported by medical evidence and themselves constituted mental cruelty. She also relied upon the incident concerning removal of the photograph of her deceased father from the matrimonial home and contended that the respondent's conduct, taken cumulatively, had made it impossible for her to continue the matrimonial relationship.

4.2. As regards permanent alimony, the petitioner claimed that the respondent was earning substantially and had considerable investments and assets. She contended that, having regard to the long duration of the marriage, her age, the two minor children in her custody, the disparity in income and the standard of living enjoyed during the marriage, she was entitled to permanent alimony of Rs.5 crore.

##PAGE6##

5. The respondent contested the claim denying the allegations