9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
1. Decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. 2. Restitution of conjugal rights. 3. Mental cruelty caused by false complaints and defamatory allegations. 4. Irretrievable breakdown of marriage. 5. Permanent alimony. Summary: Decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion: The appellant-husband sought dissolution of marriage u/s 13(1)(i-a) and (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, claiming cruelty and desertion by the respondent-wife. The Family Court granted the decree of divorce, citing mental cruelty caused by the respondent-wife's false complaints and defamatory allegations, including a complaint u/s 498-A of IPC. The High Court, however, set aside the decree, stating that the lodging of a complaint does not constitute cruelty and that the couple did not live together long enough for cruelty to occur. The Supreme Court disagreed, emphasizing that mental cruelty does not require cohabitation and can be inflicted through false and defamatory complaints. Restitution of conjugal rights: The respondent-wife filed a petition u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for restitution of conjugal rights, which the Family Court dismissed. The High Court reversed this decision, granting restitution of conjugal rights. The Supreme Court found that the respondent-wife's conduct, including filing multiple legal proceedings and false complaints, amounted to mental cruelty, making restitution of conjugal rights untenable. Mental cruelty caused by false complaints and defamatory allegations: The Supreme Court noted that the respondent-wife's false and defamatory allegations, including a statement that the appellant-husband's mother asked her to sleep with his father, caused significant mental anguish to the appellant-husband. The Court held that such conduct constitutes mental cruelty, justifying the dissolution of marriage. Irretrievable breakdown of marriage: The Supreme Court observed that the couple had been living separately for over ten years, indicating an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. The Court emphasized that a marriage that is beyond repair due to prolonged separation and bitterness should be dissolved to relieve both parties of pain and anguish. Permanent alimony: Recognizing the respondent-wife's dependence on her parents and her prolonged litigation, the Supreme Court directed the appellant-husband to pay Rs. 15,00,000/- as permanent alimony in three instalments to secure her future. Conclusion: The Supreme Court quashed the High Court's judgment, dissolved the marriage by a decree of divorce, and directed the appellant-husband to pay permanent alimony to the respondent-wife. The Court also highlighted the importance of mediation in matrimonial disputes and issued directions for referring such cases to mediation centres to explore the possibility of settlement.
|
