SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(SC) 61

R.M. SAHAI AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.
Civil Appeal No. 714 of 1995 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 20435 of 1994), D/- 13-1-1995.
Romesh Chander, Appellant
Versus
Smt. Savitri, Respondent.

Advocates:
Baldev Atreya, D.V.Sehgal, M.S.Gupta, PRATIBHA JAIN, S.B.SANYAL

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 142 - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13(1)(ia) - Claim Divorce - Transferring only house - Appellant a sanitary inspector and respondent his wife a teacher have enjoyed company of each other as husband and wife Within years this is second round of litigation which routing through Trial Court and High Court has reached this Court- earlier one founded on desertion was decided this Court against husband - This appeal is based on cruelty- Both Courts below have found that even though wife had cast serious aspersions on character of appellant in written statement filed by her earlier and alleged that he was in habit of mixing with undesirable girls in presence of respondent yet since neither any evidence was led nor it was proved consequently it could not be made basis for claiming divorce on cruelty –Held, Considering facts and circumstances of this case court in exercise of power Constitution of India direct that marriage between appellant and respondent shall stand dissolved subject to appellant transferring house in name of his wife- house shall be transferred within four months from today- dissolution shall come into effect from house is transferred and possession is handed over respondent Court has explained concept of cruelty both mental and physical which could entitle an applicant claim divorce Hindu Marriage it was held that if a marriage was dead and there was no chance of its being retrieved it was better to bring it to an end- In this case marriage is dead both emotionally and practically- Continuance of marital alliance for name-sake is prolonging agony and affliction- It cannot be disputed that husband has not been dutiful and conscious of his responsibilities either towards his wife or his son- He did not contribute anything towards upbringing of child- Yet marriage being dead continuance of would be cruelty specially when child born out of wedlock of appellant and respondent as far back having now grown and being in service appellant has expressed remorse for his conduct and is willing to compensate for his past mistakes by transferring only house in his name in of his wife - Order accordingly

Judgement

R. M. SAHAI, J.:- Should a marriage which is otherwise dead emotionally and practically be continued for name-sake is the issue for consideration in this appeal.

2. Twenty five years have elapsed since the appellant, a sanitary inspector, and the respondent, his wife a teacher, have enjoyed the company of each other as husband and wife. Within these 25 years this is the second round of litigation which routing through the Trial Court and the High Court has reached this Court. The earlier one founded on desertion was decided by this Court against the husband on 23rd April 1980. This appeal is based on cruelty. Both the Courts below have found that even though the wife had cast serious aspersions on the character of the appellant in the written statement filed by her earlier and alleged that he was in the habit of mixing with undesirable girls in the presence of respondent yet since neither any evidence was led nor it was proved consequently it could not be made basis for claiming divorce on cruelty.

3. In V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat (Mrs.), (1994) 1 SCC 337 : (1994 AIR SCW 45) this Court has explained the concept of cruelty both mental and physical which could entitle an applicant to claim divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. In Chanderkala Trivedi (Smt.) v. Dr. S. P. Trivedi, (1993) 4 SCC 232 it was held that if a marriage was dead and there was no chance of its being retrieved it was better to bring it to an end. In this case the marriage is dead both emotionally and practically. Continuance of marital alliance for name-sake is prolonging the agony and affliction. It cannot be disputed that the husband has not been dutiful and conscious of his responsibilities either to-wards his wife or his son. He did not contribute any thing towards upbringing of the child. Yet the marriage being dead, the continuance of it would be cruelty, specially when the child born out of the wedlock of the appellant and the respondent as far back as 1968 having now grown and being in service. The appellant has expressed remorse for his conduct and is willing to compensate for his past mistakes by transferring the only house in his name in favour of his wife.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case we, in exercise of power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, direct that the marriage between appellant and the respondent shall stand dissolved subject to the appellant transferring the house in the name of his wife. The house shall be transferred within four months from today. The dissolution shall come into effect from the date the house is transferred and possession is handed over to the respondent.

5. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. Parties shall bear their own costs.

Order accordingly.

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