Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 80372
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.Velmurugan, K.K.Ramakrishnan, JJ
C.S.Rajendra Kulothungan – Appellant
Versus
P.Sindhu Sowmiya – Respondent
C.M.A(MD)No.756 of 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan
For the Respondents: Mr.J.Barathan for Mr.V.Sasikumar
The court held that unproven allegations of cruelty and temperamental differences do not justify divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Headnote:(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13(1)(i-a) - Divorce - Appeal against dismissal of divorce petition on grounds of cruelty - Allegations of mental and physical cruelty were not substantiated - Court found no evidence of negligence leading to child's death and held that temperamental differences do not warrant divorce. (Paras 12-20)
(B) Evidence - The court emphasized the necessity of specific pleadings to support claims of cruelty and the importance of mutual support in marriage. (Paras 16-18)
Facts of the case:
The appellant filed for divorce citing mental cruelty due to the respondent's behavior during and after pregnancy, leading to the death of their child.
Findings of Court:
The trial judge found no evidence of cruelty or negligence on the part of the respondent.
Issues: Whether the appellant is entitled to relief of divorce based on alleged cruelty.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that mere temperamental differences and unproven allegations of cruelty do not justify the dissolution of marriage.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the appellant claims cruelty due to the respondent's behavior impacting their marriage. (Para 4) |
| 2. the appellant's counsel argues for divorce based on alleged cruelty and neglect. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. the court evaluates the evidence and finds no substantial proof of cruelty. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. the court concludes that the marriage should not be dissolved based on unproven claims. (Para 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT
[Order of the Court was made by Mr.K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.] Husband is the appellant and he has filed this Civil Miscellaneous appeal challenging the dismissal order of his divorce petition in H.M.O.P.No. 2 of 2020 on the file of the Family Court, Karur without accepting his plea for the divorce on the ground of cruelty.
2. The appellant married the respondent on 08.01.2013 according to the Hindu Rites and their caste customs. The appellant was M.Sc., decree holder and completed Ph.D., in Bio-technology and got Doctorate. The respondent was M.Sc., degree holder. The appellant was working in Novozymes South Asia Pvt Ltd., Bangalore. The respondent was working in UST Global, Bangalore. After marriage both lived together at Bangalore. The respondent became pregnant and hence she was brought to the Lalbagh Nursing Home Bangalore. At the time, due to uterine tumours, the doctors advised to be extremely careful and get admitted immediately on getting labour pain. The respondent without acting as per doctor's advise, continued to ride her two wheeler to reach the work place. At the time her mother stayed with her to help during pregnancy. One morning, the respondent developed labour pain and she informed the appellant. Instead to going to the hospital, she without heeding appellant's advise went to the hospital in evening and took treatment. The appellant came to know that the respondent left the hospital against the medical advise within two days. The respondent again developed pain and on the way to the hospital the respondent started quarrelling with the appellant on flimsy reason and she allegedly abused him in vulgar words. According to the appellant during the course of the pregnancy, the respondent got gestational diabetes and thyroid problem and she was given medication for thyroid problem. The doctor advised her to keep the blood sugar in control by taking balanced intake and walking. But the respondent did not understand the seriousness and failed to give the correct particulars of the blood sugar to him. The father of the appellant also advised her to take care of her health and act as per the advise of the doctor. That being the situation, the appellant was infected by flu and hence he isolated himself and stayed in a separate room of his house. Then, within two days, the respondent also complained of body pain and hence both of them went to the Lalbagh Nursing Home. The doctor diagnosed the respondent with urinary track infection. Due to that womb also was found affected and hence she begot a premature female baby on 04.09.2013. In spite of the best neonatal intensive care in the K.R. Hospital, the child died. According to the appellant the doctors informed that the baby had respiratory distress syndrome and was infected with streptococcus which was caused due to the uterine infection. Due to that said baby was kept in the intensive care unit and baby's condition was critical. The same was not at all realized by the respondent and the respondent shouted at the appellant and yelling whether the baby was more important than her. In spite of the treatment, the baby died after 14 days on 18.09.2014. The events stated above caused mental agony and severe depression to the appellant and only due to the negligence of the respondent, the child died. Hence the death of the child caused severe trauma in the mind of the appellant.
2.1.Apart from that the respondent has not disclosed her salary particulars to the appellant till date and he alone met the family expenses and the respondent demanded Rs.25,000/- p
