• +91-9223281789
  • sui-generis@consultant.com

Custody of a minor wife – Marriage with a minor girl – Does not lead to termination  of marriage as the act is silent about it – As marriage was solemnised without consent of parents of the girl as such husband is not entitled to her custody till she attains majority. (Remani T.T. Vs Narayana Kutty) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 30 (Kerala)

Marriage a Christian lady with a Hindu – Children born out of such marriage are not Hindu as religion of such children is to be fixed by the religion to which the mother belongs. (Vijayakumari Vs Devabalan) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 423 (Kerala)

Marriage of a Christian lady with a Hindu is not a valid marriage under Hindu Marriage Act as under Hindu Marriage Act marriage can be solemnised only between two Hindus. (Vijayakumari Vs Devabalan) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 423 (Kerala)

Second marriage during subsistence of first marriage performed prior to enforcement of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is not illegal or void. (Nimmo Devi & Anr. Vs Manni Devi & Ors.) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 625 (P&H)

Matrimonial proceedings – Medical examination – A party can be compelled for medical examination and such an order is not in violation of personal liberty – Order for medical examination can only be passed if applicant has a strong prima facie case and there is sufficient material before the Court – If despite the order of Court respondent refuses to submit himself to medical examination then Court can draw an adverse inference. (Sharda Vs Dharmpal) 2003(1) Apex Court Judgments 487 (S.C.) : 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 27 (S.C.) 

Second marriage during subsistence of first marriage – Second wife cannot get the legal status of a wife so as to be entitled to the benefits of the deceased husband – Mere fact that name of second wife was furnished by deceased husband and entered in service record will not alter the situation in any way in view of clear legal position – Second wife is not entitled to the benefits of the deceased husband. (Nallagondla Kanthamma Vs Nallagondala Rajyam & Ors.) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 431 (A.P.)

Second marriage during subsistence of first marriage – Second wife is not entitled to the benefits of the deceased husband – Children born out of second marriage are entitled to the benefits of deceased father – Death of one child born out of second marriage – Second wife being mother is entitled to the share of the benefits to which deceased child might have been entitled in law. (Nallagondla Kanthamma Vs Nallagondala Rajyam & Ors.) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 431 (A.P.)

Marriage – Validity of marriage challenged – No presumption can be drawn that essential ceremonies were performed – There has to be some material and cogent evidence from which an inference can be drawn that the ceremony of saptapadi for constituting a valid marriage was performed – The same cannot be deduced from the mere surrounding and attending circumstances.(Vinit Kumar Behl Vs Ruchi) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 04 (P&H)

Marriage – Validity – Ceremonies – Sapatapadi – Its performance is not an essential requirement for valid marriage. (Neelavva Vs Divisional Controller) AIR 2002 Karnataka 347

Restitution of conjugal rights – Pleadings – Rules of pleading substantially applies to applications for restitution of conjugal rights and the written statement filed in that respect. (Kunjabihari Pradhan Vs Jayanti Pradhan) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 129 (Orissa) 

Execution of order passed u/s 9 of the Act – In case order is not obeyed then the property of the opposite party can be attached – No force can be used to get the lady to conjugal house. (Vijay Kumar Vs Neelam Rani) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 239 (Rajasthan)

Restitution of conjugal rights – Earlier petition of husband for grant of divorce on ground of desertion dismissed and it was decided that desertion by wife could not lead to grant of matrimonial relief – Decision became final – Subsequent petition for restitution of conjugal rights by husband – Liable to be dismissed. (Smt.Karabi Das Vs Paritosh Das) AIR 2003 Calcutta 61

Restitution of conjugal rights – Petition by husband – Wife maltreated and turned out of house – No efforts made to bring her back – Wife is justified to live away from her husband – Petition dismissed. (Gurmit Singh Vs Veerpal Kaur) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 116 (P&H)

Restitution of conjugal rights – Petition by wife – Wife forced to leave matrimonial home because of ill treatment for dowry demand – No efforts made by husband to bring back wife – Allegations supported by evidence on record – No allegation that wife was having relationship with anybody else or had special reason to leave matrimonial house – Wife entitled for decree. (Pradeep Kumar Pradhan Vs Dalima Sahu) AIR 2003 Orissa 79

Restitution of conjugal rights – Petition filed after 8 years of the departure of wife from the matrimonial home – There is inordinate delay in filing the petition by husband for restitution of conjugal rights – Petition held to be misconceived – Husband not entitled to decree for restitution of conjugal rights. (Satya Devi Vs Sat Pal) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 381 (P&H) 

Restitution of conjugal rights – Withdrawal from the society of one spouse by the other – Must be on some reasonable grounds – Allegations of wife of mal-treatment and constant demand of dowry not proved – Demand of wife that husband should live in the village of wife so that she could serve her mother – Wife has no reasonable excuse or sufficient cause to withdraw from the society of husband – Decree of restitution of conjugal rights passed by trial Court upheld. (Sukhwinder Kaur Vs Attar Singh) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 686 (P&H)

Wife wanted husband to live with her in her parents house whereas husband liked that wife should live with him in quarter allotted to him – Evidence on record that it was wife who abandoned her husband, deserted him and had gone to her parents house – Held, husband is entitled to decree for restitution of conjugal rights. (Sapna Banerjee Vs Rabindra Nath Banerjee) AIR 2002 Jharkhand 111

Judicial separation – Wife alleged to live matrimonial house and that she went to her father’s house without his consent – Husband failing to prove allegation of cruelty and desertion against wife – Statement of wife that she was still separately living in one room of the quarter of her husband – Petition dismissed. (Bishwanath Pandey Vs Anjana Devi) AIR 2002 Jharkhand 112

Judicial separation and divorce – Distinction – In case of judicial separation, marriage between parties is put under suspended animation while residing separately without any conjugal rights over the other – In case of divorce marital ties get snapped – Judicial separation offers opportunity to parties to reconcile their differences and come together – Failure to reconcile may be a ground for dissolution of marriage – Approach to the problems of judicial separation and divorce need not be one and the same – Different parameters are followed for judicial separation and divorce – Decree of judicial separation can be rescinded on reconciliation by parties which does not arise in the case of divorce. (Dr.N.Shiva Mohana Reddy Vs Smt.Aparna Reddy) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 417 (A.P.)

Annulment of marriage – Custom among Jat Sikhs of District Sangrur, permitting dissolution of marriage by divorce through writing executed by parties – Such divorce is recognised in view of S.29(2) of Act – Wife, Jat Sikh, validly obtained divorce from her previous husband at the time when her marriage had taken place with petitioner – It cannot be said that wife was not divorcee at time of her marriage with petitioner – Marriage between petitioner and respondent could not be annulled on ground of fraud. (Jasbir Singh Vs Inderjit Kaur) AIR 2003 P&H 317

Cruelty and desertion – Can be inferred from totality of facts – Wife leaving house of husband without animus revertendi – Amounts to cruelty entitling husband to seek decree for judicial separation. (Smt.Karuna Vs Jiwan Parkash) AIR 2002 H.P. 127

Annulment of marriage – Wife having no vagina and husband not able to perform sexual intercourse – Wife has also no uterus – Medical evidence also supported plea of husband – Marriage not consummated owing to impotence of wife – Decree of divorce – Not liable to be interfered with. (Jyotsnaben Vs Pravinchandra) AIR 2003 Gujarat 222

Fraud and misrepresentation – Petition by husband for annulment of marriage – In application for registration of marriage and in affidavit in support thereof wife stated her status as “unmarried” – Husband in fact had prepared those documents and wife had only signed them – Fact itself would not prove that fraudulent mis-statement was made – Documents to show that husband was aware of marital status of wife at the time of marriage – In the advertisement status of wife was shown as “legally divorce” – Petition rightly rejected. (Perminder Charan Singh etc. Vs Harjit Kaur) 2003(1) Apex Court Judgments 711 (S.C.)

Petition by wife – Impotence of husband alleged – Husband denied allegation with counter allegation that non-consummation was because the wife has deliberately avoided consummation of marriage even though he was ready and willing to discharge his marital obligation – Held, it does not amount to admission as it is neither unequivocal nor positive – Court, held, justified in not pronouncing judgment based on such defence and in passing order in favour of wife, for payment of maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings. (Shiva Kumar T.A. Vs Smt.Pushpa Rekha) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 234 (Karnataka) 

Divorce petition by husband on ground of cruelty and prayer for decree of nullity on ground of non consummation of marriage owing to impotence of wife –  Doctor opined that although wife has had sexual intercourse but she was not habituated to it – Plea of non consummation of marriage, therefore, is not available – However, ground of cruelty stands proved as wife during the pendency of divorce petition had filed criminal complaint u/s 498-A IPC against husband, his aged mother and sister-in-law which was dismissed – Parties lived together for a few months and there were constant quarrels – Divorce granted on ground of cruelty – Husband directed to pay maintenance of Rs.1200/- per month. (Sadhana Satish Kolvankar Vs Satish Sachidanand Kolvankar) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 75 (Bombay)

Adultery – Non impleading of adultator as a co-respondent – Petition is not maintainable for not joining necessary party. (Ram Kumar @ Ramender Kumar Vs Smt.Raksha @ Galabo) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 70 (P&H) 

Cruelty – Act of wife leaving matrimonial home without husband’s consent and not returning thereafter – Amounts to cruelty. (Rakesh Sharma Vs Surbhi Sharma) AIR 2002 Rajasthan 138

Cruelty – Can be physical or mental – Conduct complained of should be “grave and weighty” so as to come to the conclusion that it is not reasonable expected to live with the other spouse – It must be something more serious than “ordinary wear and tear of married life”. (A.Jayachandra Vs Aneel Kaur) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 318 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 402 (S.C.)

Cruelty – Extent of – Should be of such a degree so as to cause an apprehension of danger to life, limb or health, physical or mental – Allegation of excessive drinking and addiction to sulfa  but the same not proved – Divorce petition dismissed.  (Mayawanti Vs Bina Ram) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 59 (P&H)

Cruelty – False allegations – Allegations of serious nature – Allegations not established and found to be concocted – Held, false allegations in itself amounts to cruelty. (Ramesh Kumar Bansal Vs Smt.Santosh Kumari Singla) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 306 (P&H) 

Cruelty – False and baseless allegations by wife in reply to notice about bad character not only against husband but also against his other family members – Amounts to cruelty. (Anita Vs Krishnakuamr) AIR 2003 Bombay 273

Cruelty – Husband alleged to be in the habit of excessive drinking and addicted to sulfa – There is no nothing to establish this aspect – Cannot be taken as an independent ground for the grant of matrimonial relief. (Mayawanti Vs Bina Ram) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 257 (P&H)

Cruelty – Husband living at Delhi and wife employed at Meerut – Wife not ready to live with husband and even not visiting him – Lodging FIR against him for offence u/s 498-A, 323 and 506 PC maliciously and without any reasonable cause – Such conduct of wife amounts to mental cruelty – Acts not condoned by husband – Husband entitled to decree of divorce. (Dr.P.K.Tomar Vs Smt.Archana) AIR 2003 Allahabad 214

Cruelty – Husband visiting office of wife, humiliating her by using objectionable language in presence of her colleagues and calling her prostitute – Husband can be said to have treated wife with cruelty – Wife entitled to grant of divorce. (Smt.Kala Kumari Vs Ram Bhawan Anand) AIR 2004 All. 54

Cruelty – Isolated incidents of misbehaviour by husband – Held, these are not sufficient to establish cruelty – mental or physical. (Mayawanti Vs Bina Ram) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 59 (P&H)

Cruelty – Levelling of false and scandalous allegations by wife against husband regarding demand of dowry and his adulterous life – Held, such false allegations constitute mental cruelty. (Rakesh Sharma Vs Surbhi Sharma)    AIR 2002 Rajasthan 138

Cruelty – Mental – Enquiry as to – Must begin as to the nature of cruel treatment and impact on such treatment in the mind of the spouse, whether it caused reasonable apprehension that it would be harmful or injurious to live with the other – Ultimately, it is a matter of inference to be drawn by taking into account the nature of the conduct and its effect on the complaining spouse – However, there may be a case where the conduct complained of itself is bad enough and per se unlawful or illegal – Then the impact or injurious effect on the other spouse need not be enquired into or considered – In such case, cruelty will be established if the conduct itself is proved or admitted. (A.Jayachandra Vs Aneel Kaur) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 318 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 402 (S.C.)

Cruelty – Mental – Has to be considered in the light of norms of marital ties of the particular society to which the parties belong, their social values, status, environment in which they live. (A.Jayachandra Vs Aneel Kaur) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 318 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 402 (S.C.)

Cruelty – Mental cruelty – Mental cruelty is far more damaging than physical cruelty – Mental cruelty continues to hurt the person all along and any amount of heeling touch or heeling words would not wipe out the scars which continue to prick and cause continuous hurt. (Manmohan Singh Vs Aneeta Preet) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 410 (P&H) 

Cruelty – Not established – Allegations and counter-allegations of misbehaviour, physical and mental torture made by both parties – Parties unable to live together – Marriage becoming death both emotionally and practically with no chances of revival – In such circumstances decree of divorce granted. (Poonam Gupta Vs Ghanshyam Gupta) AIR 2003 Allahabad 51

Cruelty – Wife alleged to have illicit relations with a person – Person with whom wife alleged to have illicit relations not examined or cross-examined though his affidavit was on record – Cannot be concluded that wife had illicit relations with her colleague etc. – Finding of cruelty by wife on that count liable to be set aside. (Anita Vs Krishnakumar) AIR 2003 Bombay 273

Cruelty and harassment for dowry – Wife seeking divorce – Husband alleged to be drug addict, alcoholic and demanding dowry – Deed of divorce executed by parties earlier – Husband admitted its execution in pleadings – Said deed cannot be excluded from consideration merely because it was not exhibited as documents – Plea by husband that both the said documents were executed as a joke and/or both of them lived together as husband and wife after execution of those documents – Not tenable – Husband proved to have received amount from his father-in-law against demand of dowry – No interference in order of dissolution of marriage – Fact that marriage between parties has irretrievably broken down is an additional reason. (Navneet Kumar Vs Meena Kumari) AIR 2002 H.P. 16

Decree for dissolution of marriage – Thirty party who has nothing to do with the relationship of husband wife cannot prefer an appeal against the said decree – He cannot intrude into their privacy – He is not an aggrieved party. (Baldev Singh Vs Surinder Mohan Sharma) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 16 (S.C.) 

Desertion – For the purpose of seeking divorce desertion means the intentional permanent forsaking and abandonment of one spouse by the other without other’s consent and without reasonable cause – A single act is not complete in itself – It is a continuous course of conduct to be determined under the facts and circumstances of each case – So far as the deserting spouse is concerned, two essential conditions must be there, (i) the factum of separation, and (ii) the intention to bring cohabitation permanently to an end (animus deserendi) – Similarly two elements are essential so far as the deserted spouse is concerned (i) the absence of consent and (ii) absence of conduct giving reasonable cause to the spouse leaving the matrimonial home to form the necessary intention. (Geeta Mullick Vs Brojo Gopal Mullick) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 333 (Calcutta)

Desertion – Husband resident of Delhi and wife employed at Meerut – Wife not ready and willing to live with husband – Suit for restitution was filed by her only to create evidence for future litigation – Even after passing of decree of restitution wife failing to comply it – Desertion was continuous and for more than two years – Husband entitled to decree of divorce. (Dr.P.K.Tomar Vs Smt.Archana) AIR 2003 Allahabad 214

Desertion – Petition by husband for divorce – Wife alleged second marriage by husband – Second marriage not proved but sufficient material placed on record that husband carved matrimonial like relationship with another woman – Decree of divorce rightly refused. (Ram Lakhan Vs Prem Kumari) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 582 (Rajasthan) 

Desertion – Wife stating that she is prepared to go back to the matrimonial home unconditionally –  – Unconditional offer of wife in proceedings before Lok Adalat can be taken into account to show her conduct as to whether there was desertion on her part. (Ram Mehar Singh  Vs Urmila Kumari) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 659 (P&H)

Desertion – Wife wanted her husband to live separately from his old parents and brothers and deserting him on this count with the intention to bring cohabitation permanently to an end – Decree of divorce validly passed. (Geeta Mullick Vs Brojo Gopal Mullick) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 333 (Calcutta)

Dissolution of marriage – Petition by husband on ground of cruelty – Institution of FIR by wife against husband under S.498-A IPC for subjecting her to cruelty which was found false after investigation – Amounts to cruelty – Husband entitled to decree of dissolution of marriage. (Narendra Kumar Gupta Vs Indu) AIR 2002 Rajasthan 169

Dissolution of marriage – Wife left matrimonial home within 6 months of marriage – Wife charge husband for impotency and mental disorder and stated that she was always ready and willing to lead normal conjugal life – Wife did not put on record strong and reliable evidence – Parties living separately for last 22 years – Efforts of conciliation failed – Decree of dissolution of marriage passed granting Rs.2.5 lacs to wife as monetary compensation. (Prabat Kumar Mitra Vs Sikha Mitra) AIR 2002 Jharkhand 154

Divorce – Appeal against decree of divorce in favour of husband – In appeal wife seeking Rs.18 lacs towards full and final settlement –  Wife given a sum of Rs.12 lacs towards lumpsum one time settlement. (Harsha Indukumar Bhojani Vs Indukumar Ratilal Bhojani) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 562 (Bombay)

Divorce – Can be sought on the grounds viz. (1)  Character assassination is a serious matrimonial offence and can found a decree for divorce; (2) Cruelty to a spouse has not been defined in the Hindu Marriage Act, and it has to be judged from the facts and circumstances of each different case, where there has been cruel treatment of one spouse by the other; (3) Cruelty – it is sufficient if the spouse can prove that it could be unreasonable or cruel to force him or her to live with the other spouse as man and wife, in the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case; (4) Allegations of bad character etc. made in pleadings can find a cause of action for divorce and the aggrieved spouse is not necessarily to be driven to a subsequent litigation based on the pleadings of the present litigation. (Smt.Kakali Das (Ghosh) Vs Dr.Asish Kumar Das) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 147 (Calcutta)

Divorce – Cannot be granted on ground that marriage has irretrievably broken down. (Swapan Kumar Ganguly Vs Smiritikana Ganguly) AIR 2002 Calcutta 6

Divorce – Cruelty – Caused by husband to wife – Wife has a cogent reason to stay away from matrimonial home – Husband, not entitled to decree of divorce on ground of desertion by wife. (Swapan Kumar Ganguly vs Smiritikana Ganguly) AIR 2002 Calcutta 6

Divorce – Cruelty – Demand of wife for a separate residence – Merely to avoid company of parents-in-law inspite of the fact that wife gets normal care, affection and facilities amounts to cruelty – However, if wife does not get proper respect, status and treatment from her parents-in-law then demand of separate residence does not amount to cruelty – Wife’s insistence on separate residence per se cannot constitute a mental cruelty, unless it is found to be totally unnecessary, unreasonable, inhuman and unfair. (Smt.Kakali Das (Ghosh) Vs Dr.Asish Kumar Das) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 147 (Calcutta)

Divorce – Cruelty – Slanderous allegation by wife about character of husband of having extra-marital relationship with another lady – Allegation not proved – Wife wrote letters to Authorities and Women Cell and also to Prime Minister – Wife was persisting to humiliate and wounding feeling of husband which amounts to cruelty – Brother of wife assaulted husband and broke his tooth – Matrimonial life causing profound and lasting disruption driving husband to feel deeply hurt and reasonably apprehended that it is impossible for him to live together – Held, husband is entitled to divorce. (D.N.Sharma Vs Usha Sharma) AIR 2004 Delhi 198

Divorce – Cruelty – Statements in the pleadings provoked by the course of litigation are not sufficient for the purpose of establishing the case of cruelty against wife and in favour of husband. (Smt.Kakali Das (Ghosh) Vs Dr.Asish Kumar Das) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 147 (Calcutta)

Divorce – Cruelty – Visit to parents house by wife – Permission of husband each and every time is not required – So long such visit  to parents house do not cause an unbearable inconvenience or does not amount to obduracy, husband cannot treat such visits as acts of cruelty. (Smt.Kakali Das (Ghosh) Vs Dr.Asish Kumar Das) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 147 (Calcutta)

Divorce – Cruelty – Wife used insultive language against parents of husband – Unrebutted – Allegation by wife regarding infidelity on part of husband not substantiated by corroborative evidence – Wife extravagant – Wife insulted husband sometime in public – Wife living separately with child – Such kind of behaviour of wife and such kind of situation culminates into cruelty – High Court while making effort for reconciliation found that there is not compatibility between the parties making them live together would be asking the two strangers to share a roof – Decree of divorce granted in favour of husband – No interference. (Shivani Chattopadhyaya Vs Siddharth Chattopadhyaya) AIR 2002 P&H 58

Divorce – Desertion – Husband seeking divorce – Wife claiming to be living separate due to dowry harassment and attempt to cause physical harm – No police complaint lodged for dowry but parties had gone to police station in this regard – Maintenance order also passed in favour of wife – Inference of desertion cannot be drawn from the fact that wife did not join husband even after panchayathdars advised to that effect – Husband not entitled to divorce. (Smt.Prabhavathi Vs K.Somashankar) AIR 2002 Karnataka 431

Divorce – Desertion – Wife at all stages and even in Supreme Court ready to go back to husband – Husband refused to take back the wife – Husband made baseless allegations against wife and even filed a complaint of bigamy u/s 494 IPC which was dismissed – Wife was forced to leave the matrimonial home – It is the husband who is at fault – It can hardly lie in the mouth of a party who is at fault and who has not allowed the marriage to work to claim that the marriage should be dissolved on the ground of irretrievable break down. (Shyam Sunder Kohli Vs Sushma Kohli @ Satya Devi) 2004(2) Apex Court Judgments 551 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 85 (S.C.)

Divorce – Husband and family members maltreating wife – Wife left with no option except to leave matrimonial home – Wife went to matrimonial home on learning of second marriage by husband – Husband maltreated her and she was forced to leave matrimonial home – Report of incident lodged with police – There was sufficient and reasonable ground for wife to leave matrimonial home – Wife not guilty of desertion – Wife is also not guilty of cruelty on account of lodging report with police – Held, husband is not entitled to decree of divorce – Irretrievable break down due to second marriage in such case cannot be ground of divorce. (Mst.Butti Vs Gulab Chand Pandey) AIR 2002 M.P. 123

Divorce – Husband seeking divorce on ground of desertion by wife – Facts showing that husband himself left his wife with her parents – No evidence to show that husband had taken steps to bring back wife to matrimonial home – It cannot be aid that wife had deserted him – Grant of decree of divorce on ground of desertion – Not permissible. (K.Palanisamy Vs P.Samiathal) AIR 2002 Madras 156

Divorce – Irretrievable break down of marriage – A party at fault cannot be allowed to get marriage dissolved on the ground of irretrievable break down of marriage. (Shyam Sunder Kohli Vs Sushma Kohli @ Satya Devi) 2004(2) Apex Court Judgments 551 (S.C.)

Divorce – Irretrievable break down of marriage – A party at fault cannot be allowed to get marriage dissolved on the ground of irretrievable break down of marriage. (Shyam Sunder Kohli Vs Sushma Kohli @ Satya Devi) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 85 (S.C.)

Divorce – Irretrievable break down of marriage – Marriage not to be dissolved lightly on the ground of irretrievable break down of marriage – Only in exceptional circumstances marriage can be dissolved on this ground. (Shyam Sunder Kohli Vs Sushma Kohli @ Satya Devi) 2004(2) Apex Court Judgments 551 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 85 (S.C.)

Divorce – Mental cruelty – Act of living together or sharing the bed with another man – Amounts to cruelty – Marriage dissolved. (Velayudhan Vs Chandrika) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 51 (Kerala) 

Divorce – Mental disorder and not psychological depression is ground for divorce – Petitioner has to prove by leading medical evidence that psychological depression is synonymous to mental disorder – Husband not led cogent evidence to prove mental disorder of wife – Decree of divorce set aside. (Hema Reddy Vs Rakesh Reddy) AIR 2002 A.P. 228

Divorce – Petition by husband – Allegation of mal-treatment – Wife alleged that husband living with her cousin sister and issues born to them – To establish said fact wife produced various documents viz; Guardianship deed, discharge ticket, Recurring deposit account in name of her husband and her cousin sister – In such circumstances dismissal of petition of husband for divorce – Proper. (Ram Lakhan Vs Smt.Prem Kumari) AIR 2003 Rajasthan 115

Divorce – Petition by husband – Claimed on ground of wife having sexual intercourse with another person and treating him with cruelty as he was illiterate – Writing love letters to a married woman not necessarily prove illicit relationship between them – Fact of wife found in the company of another man is not sufficient to infer adultery or sexual intercourse – Wife talking to a man does not amount to illicit intimacy between them – Inconsistencies in the pleadings and proof – No evidence to prove that letters said to have been found in a box having been written by another man – No proof as to whom the said box belongs – Husband not familiar with the handwriting of 2nd respondent, he being an illiterate – No independent evidence adduced to prove those letters – Husband not produced acceptable and reliable evidence to prove illicit intimacy and cruelty – Petition dismissed. (Alapati Venkayamma Vs Alapati Kesava Rao & Anr.) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 505 (A.P.)

Divorce – Petition by husband – Wife abandoned her matrimonial husband as husband living with another woman and separate case pending against him u/s 494 IPC – In such circumstances it is incompatible for wife to continue to stay with her husband – Marriage between parties has come to an irretrievable end and their relationship cannot be restored – Divorce granted. (Pratima Biswal Vs Amulay Kumar Biswal) AIR 2002 Orissa 125

Divorce – Rape of wife – Not a ground of divorce – Husband cannot claim cruelty because he has to live with a rape victim. (Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs Smt.Rekha Singh & Ors.) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 525 (Allahabad)

Divorce – Time involved in litigation – Alone cannot be a ground to contend that marriage is dead. (Neeta Kirit Desai Vs Bino Samuel George) AIR 2003 Bombay 7

Divorce petition by husband – Cruelty and desertion – Once it is held that wife has not treated the husband with cruelty husband is not entitled to seek dissolution of marriage on ground of desertion – Wife given severe beatings and turned out of matrimonial home – Wife still ready and willing to reside with the husband – No animus deserendi on part of wife – It is the husband who has created such circumstances so as to force wife to leave the matrimonial home – Held, husband is not entitled to seek divorce on ground of desertion. (Radha Rani Vs Har Bhagwan) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 570 (P&H)

Divorce petition by husband – Evidence of wife that husband had developed illicit relationship with another lady supported by evidence of father of husband – Plea of husband that wife deserted him without any justifiable reasons, not tenable – Evidence also reveals that husband had filed the petition with an oblique motive to get rid of legally married wife – Petition based on false and frivolous averments – Liable to be dismissed. (Laxmi Mallik Vs Mayadhar Mallik) AIR 2002 Orissa 5

– Divorce petition by husband on ground of cruelty and desertion – Husband a doctor residing in Germany – Wife held to be not a dutiful and obedient wife but no finding that there was cruelty on part of her but divorce still granted – No direct evidence as husband did not enter witness box – Only mother of appellant who had no personal knowledge gave evidence and many of the incidents alleged by husband happened in Germany and there was no direct evidence to support of those facts – Husband rightly held not entitled to divorce. (Perminder Charan Singh etc. Vs Harjit Kaur) 2003(1) Apex Court Judgments 711 (S.C.)

False allegation by wife – Allegation by wife that husband is interested in getting married with another girl in his close relation – Said allegation not proved by wife – It does not mean that it is disproved and it is a false allegation made against petitioner which may amount to cruelty. (Hema Reddy Vs Rakesh Reddy) AIR 2002 A.P. 228

Ground of adultery by wife – Untainted evidence of witnesses leading to irresistible conclusion about adulterous conduct of wife – Explanation of wife not truthful – Allegations by wife about illicit relations of husband with other lady – Levelled only to counter facts pleaded by husband – Evidence produced by wife not sufficient to disprove charge of cruelty and adultery levelled against her – Husband establishing that conduct of wife caused disgrace to him in society and caused mental agony – Marriage between parties, irretrievably broken down and there are no chances of their living together – No interference in decree of divorce granted in favour of husband – Late filing of petition for divorce cannot be said to be fatal in facts and circumstances of the case. (Nidhi Dalela Vs Deepak Dalela) AIR 2002 Rajasthan 128

Husband filed petition for divorce – Ground that wife not willing to live at husband’s house and wanted to keep her with him or to keep her separately at place ‘C’ – Fact that husband living abroad and visits India sometimes – Husband did not enter the witness box – Brother of husband and Sarpanch of village stated that wife not willing to stay with parents of husband – In proceedings before Lok Adalat it was recorded that husband was living in USA and wife in Germany and there was no possibility of compromise – In such circumstances wife cannot be said to have deserted husband – Decree of divorce cannot be granted. (Sucha Singh VS Paramjit Kaur) AIR 2002 P&H 46

Irretrievable break down of marriage – Not a ground for seeking divorce. (Mayawanti Vs Bina Ram) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 257 (P&H)

Irretrievable breakdown of  marriage is not a ground to seek divorce under the Act. (Mayawanti Vs Bina Ram) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 59 (P&H)

Marriage – Dissolution before Panchayat – Marriage can be dissolved by a decree of divorce by the Court and not in any proceedings before the Panchayat and wife is not bound by the compromise unless of course she herself consents to the same and gives her consent in proceedings seeking divorce before the matrimonial Court. (Rajesh Kumar Madaan  Vs Mrs.Mamta alias Veena ) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 433 (P&H)

Mental cruelty – Complaint to Police – SHO not summoned for production of complaint – Without ascertaining the contents of complaint it cannot be said that there is harassment and humiliation – No positive or corroborated evidence produced to show any mental cruelty – Held, cruelty not proved. (Ajmer Singh Vs Ranjit Kaur) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 308 (P&H) 

Divorce by mutual consent – Recall/review of decree on ground of fraud – Recall/review petition does not lie if one party plays fraud on the other – Aggrieved party has to file a separate suit – If fraud is played on Court only then review petition is maintainable u/s 151 CPC. (Anita Vs R.Rambilas) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 284 (A.P.) 

Appeal against order under section 9 – During pendency of appeal parties seeking divorce by mutual consent – More than six months have already elapsed as to pendency of proceedings and parties not living together – Held, no useful purpose will be served to allow litigation to continue any further – Application u/s 9 allowed to be converted into one under section 13-B – Divorce by mutual consent allowed. (Sukhjit Kaur Vs Sikandar Singh) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 299 (Rajasthan)

Divorce by mutual consent – During pendency of LPA against dismissal of divorce petition filed by husband – During its pendency parties jointly filed application seeking divorce by mutual consent on ground of temperamental incompatibility – In view of fact that parties had no monetary and other claims against each other and were remarriageable – Waiting period condoned and decree of divorce by mutual consent passed. (Dr.Subharajyoti Das Vs Smt.Uttama Das) AIR 2002 Gauhati 117

Divorce by mutual consent – Husband and wife living separately for period of more than one year – Not able to live together – Ingredients of S.13-B(1) satisfied – Court is bound to accept petition and grant relief of divorce. (In re: K.S.Subramanian) AIR 2002 Madras 228

Divorce by mutual consent – Joint application – Continued wilful absence of husband from next date of hearing – Inference can be drawn that consent which was initially given continued – If husband wanted to withdraw his consent he should take positive stand and inform Court – Order refusing to grant decree of divorce on basis of mutual consent on ground that consent of husband was missing at second stage – Liable to be set aside. (Smt.Suman Vs Surendra Kumar) AIR 2003 Rajasthan 155

Divorce by mutual consent – Joint petition filed – Statement of parties recorded – Case adjourned after six months – Husband not appearing on adjourned date – Application of wife for summoning husband as witness rejected – No procedure to issue notice to husband to appear – Held, merely because the second motion was not signed by both the parties it cannot be said that consent of husband was missing at second stage – Consent if not withdrawn by a positive act, inference would be that consent initially given continues – Silence of husband amounts to consent to decree of divorce – Decree of divorce by mutual consent granted. (Suman Vs Surendra Kumar) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 393 (Rajasthan) 

Divorce by mutual consent – Recall of decree – Wife alleged consent obtained by fraud – Wife failing to prove the alleged fraud – Wife graduate and her brother an Advocate – Wife never complained about fraud played by husband to anyone in spite of having several opportunities – Wife might have decided to go for divorce by mutual consent on the alleged ground of demanding dowry by her husband in a huge sum – She had given up custody of her child and her right of maintenance for reasons known to her – Order of Family Court dismissing recall/review petition, upheld. (Anita Vs R.Rambilas) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 284 (A.P.)

Divorce by mutual consent – Waiting period of six months – Dispensing with – Proceedings pending for divorce – By way of amendment converted into a petition for divorce by mutual consent – Waiting period of six months can be dispensed with on two counts viz (1) If consent is not obtained by force, fraud or undue influence and that the petition has not been presented or prosecuted in collusion with the respondent; (2) and secondly on amendment of petition it relates back to the date of institution of divorce petition and waiting period of six months is to be counted from the date of institution of original petition and waiting period of six months had already expired. (Chander Kanta Vs Mohinder Partap Dogra) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 564 (P&H) 

Divorce by mutual consent – Waiting period of six months – Petition u/s 13 by husband – Dismissal – Appeal against – During pendency of appeal parties compromised – Held, period of six months is to be counted from the date of petition filed u/s 13 of the Act. (Kuldip Singh Vs Surinder Kaur) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 33 (P&H) 

Divorce by mutual consent – Waiting period of six months – Can be brought down when divorce by mutual consent is sought in a divorce petition already pending for more than six months – Provision of S.13-B(2) is directory and not mandatory. (Dineshkumar Shukla Vs Smt.Neeta) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 161 (M.P.)

Recall/review petition – Allegation by wife that her consent was obtained by husband by fraud, coercion and threat – Wife, an educated lady, had opportunities to complaint to many people about fraud played on her but she did not choose to do so – It by itself is sufficient to prove that wife on her own accord agreed to sign divorce petition as husband used to give mental torture to her by demanding a dowry of Rs.25 lakhs for doing business – Plea of coercion and threat a concocted story – Fact of giving up custody of child and right of maintenance by her also does not prove her allegation – Petition is not maintainable. (Smt.Anita Vs R.Rambilas) AIR 2003 A.P. 32

Waiting period of six months – Condonation – No possibility of living together – Adjournment of case for six months as required statutorily would be futile – Period of six months condoned. (Navjot Kaur Vs Balwinder Singh) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 204 (P&H)  

Divorce by mutual consent – Jurisdiction – Wife residing at Gwalior – Court at Gwalior has jurisdiction to entertain the joint petition by husband and wife for divorce by mutual consent. (Uma Tiwari Vs Vikrant Tiwari) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 67 (M.P.)

Divorce – Irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Not a ground of divorce – Court, if satisfied that continuation of marriage and emotionally dead relationship constitute an act of oppressive mental cruelty, it may grant a decree of divorce.  (Dilip Kumar Karmakar Vs Biju Rani Karmakar) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 07(Calcutta)

Cruelty – Divorce – Allegations of husband that wife used to leave his company by going to her parental house without his permission and  that she used to insult him before the guests and  that she did not cook for him – This do not amount to cruelty on the basis of which marriage between the parties can be dissolved – These allegations are general in nature and because of these trivial disputes, the marriage cannot be dissolved. (Amrit Pal Kaur Vs Roshan Lal) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 438 (P&H)

Divorce – Alleged demand of dowry though vague and not reliable but incident of beating and causing burn injury on back proved – Minor errors about dates etc. not material in case of illiterate lady – Parties living separately for the last nine years with no possibility to reconcile and reside together – Divorce granted. (Meera Vs Ramesh Chand) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 214 (Rajasthan)

Divorce – Cruelty – Husband alleging that wife quarrelling with him and removed her mangalsutra from her neck in front of his family members and neighbours and threw same on road side gutter – Such allegation made by counsel without any instructions from husband – Husband admitting that there was no quarrel between him and his wife on that date – Wife was also not residing with husband on that particular date – Grant of divorce by ignoring admission made by husband – Improper. (Shobha Srinivas Bodigar Vs Srinivas Veeranna Bodigar) AIR 2002 Karnataka 256

Divorce – Cruelty – Solitary act of wife, an illiterate lady, of removing her Mangalsutra and throwing same on roadside gutter in heat of moment – Does not constitute mental cruelty. (Shobha Srinivas Bodigar Vs Srinivas Veeranna Bodigar) AIR 2002 Karnataka 256

Cruelty – Baseless allegation by wife that husband is having illicit relations with another woman – It is cruelty and a ground for divorce. (Harsha Indukumar Bhojani Vs Indukumar Ratilal Bhojani) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 562 (Bombay)

Cruelty – Divorce petition by wife – Demand of dowry by husband, his false allegations of infidelity against wife, physical violence and acts showing sexual perversion – Entitles wife to claim dissolution of marriage. (Tulasamma Vs N.Seenan) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 347 (Karnataka) 

Cruelty – To establish cruelty, the conduct must be of such a character as to cause danger to life, limb or health, (physical or mental) so as to give rise to a reasonable apprehension of such a danger – It depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case which is to be assessed bearing in mind the social status of the parties, their customs and traditions, their educational level and the environment in which they live. (Ram Mehar Singh  Vs Urmila Kumari) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 659 (P&H)

Cruelty – Wife quarrelled with two married daughters of her husband from first marriage – Daughters stopped visiting father’s house – Wife also not behaving well with her mother-in-law who shifted to her  second son – Husband deprived of company of his daughters and mothers – Held, this amounts to cruelty – Divorce granted. (Harsha Indukumar Bhojani Vs Indukumar Ratilal Bhojani) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 562 (Bombay)

Divorce – Petition by husband – Allegation of causing mental cruelty and adultery – Wife denying allegation and making counter allegation that husband had driven her out of house along with two children, forcing her to take refuge at her parent’s home – No evidence led to substantiate allegation of adultery – Making a baseless allegation is grave assault on honour, reputation and status of wife which by itself constitutes cruelty – Dismissal of petition – Proper. (G.Siddagangappa Vs Smt.R.Shailaja) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 694 (Karnataka)

Document – Proof – Mere marking of document as exhibit does not make the document admissible in evidence – A document must be proved by formal mode of proof enjoined by the provisions of Evidence Act. (Kailash Devi Vs Jai Kishan (Lance Naik) & Anr.) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 87 (P&H)

Adultery – “Seen in a compromise position” – Evidence of such a witness is in the nature of a chance encounter – Though chance witness is not necessarily a false witness, however, it is rash to rely upon such evidence. (Kailash Devi Vs Jai Kishan (Lance Naik) & Anr.) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 87 (P&H)

Adultery – Proof – Standard of proof is higher and a strict measure  of proof is required, though it may not be beyond shadow of reasonable doubt as is required in a criminal case but at the same time it is also not on mere preponderance of probabilities – Proceedings for divorce on ground of adultery partakes character of quasi criminal procedure. (Kailash Devi Vs Jai Kishan (Lance Naik) & Anr.) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 87 (P&H)

Divorce – Illicit relationship – Mental cruelty – Ground of divorce and plea of defence – Held, when divorce is claimed on this ground then the same must be proved or established to get a decree but when such plea is raised by  way of defence it is sufficient to present the circumstances producing such apprehension/suspicion. (Dilip Kumar Karmakar Vs Biju Rani Karmakar) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 07(Calcutta)

Divorce – Illicit relationship – Mental cruelty – Taken up as a plea of defence in a petition for divorce filed by husband – Husband’s attempt to hide relationship with a lady falsely saying that she is his maternal aunt and his insistence on staying in house of that lady – Enough to provide basis to entertain a suspicion – Cannot be said to be unfounded – Husband not entitled to divorce. (Dilip Kumar Karmakar Vs Biju Rani Karmakar) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 07(Calcutta)

Character assassination in written statement – Is a great assault on the character, honour and reputation of wife  – Amounts to worst form of insult and cruelty – Sufficient by itself for a grant of decree of divorce. (Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate Vs Neela Vijaykumar Bhate) 2003(1) Apex Court Judgments 677 (S.C.) : 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 487 (S.C.) 

Character assassination in written statement – Subsequent amendment of written statement and accusations withdrawn – The indelible impact and scar it initially created cannot be said to be ipso facto dissolved with amendment of written statement. (Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate Vs Neela Vijaykumar Bhate) 2003(1) Apex Court Judgments 677 (S.C.) : 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 487 (S.C.) 

Cruelty – Allegations levelled by respondent not false – Does not amount to cruelty. (Ram Kumar @ Ramender Kumar Vs Smt.Raksha @ Galabo) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 70 (P&H)

Cruelty – Divorce – Cruelty must be of such a type which will satisfy the conscience of the Court that the relationship between the parties has deteriorated to such an extent that it has become impossible for them to live together without mental agony. (Anita Krishnakumar Kachba Vs Krishnakumar Ramchandra Kachba) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 323 (Bombay) 

Cruelty – Earlier petition – Withdrawn when husband promised to mend his ways – Withdrawal of earlier petition cannot be regarded as condonation on the part of the spouse to operate as estoppel to file a second petition on the same cause. (Dev Goswami Vs Gulshan Sharma) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 626 (P&H)

Cruelty – FIR lodged by wife against husband for offences of cheating, forgery and enticing married woman with criminal intent – Offences alleged to have been committed by husband are of serious nature –  Criminal proceeding not concluded yet – If the husband of his own accord had stooped down to commit such acts in spite of the protest of wife which acts amounts to offence then husband has to think himself for the plight in which he stood placed – Action of wife is not such which warrants annulment of marriage – Marriage and criminal activities of husband and remedial action sought for by the wife in law had to be kept apart. (Smt.Neelu Kohli Vs Naveen Kohli) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 505 (Allahabad)

Cruelty – Husband in habit of visiting office of his wife and humiliating her by calling her prostitute – It is physical and mental cruelty – Wife is entitled to divorce. (Kala Kumari Vs Ram Bhawan Anand) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 477 (Allahabad)

Cruelty – In reply to notice wife made false and wild allegations as to character of husband and also against his other family members so as to injure the reputation – Amounts to cruelty. (Anita Krishnakumar Kachba Vs Krishnakumar Ramchandra Kachba) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 323 (Bombay) 

Cruelty – Initiation of criminal proceedings by wife against husband – Wife not able to prove her allegations beyond a reasonable doubt so as to warrant the conviction – Does not mean that the allegations have caused cruelty. (Radha Rani Vs Har Bhagwan) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 544 (P&H)

Cruelty – Initiation of legal proceedings for redressal of the rights or for punishment to the wrong doer – Cannot be said to be acts of cruelty. (Radha Rani Vs Har Bhagwan) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 544 (P&H)

Cruelty – Intention to be cruel is not an essential element – It is sufficient that cruelty is of such type that it is impossible for spouses to live together. (Smt.Neelu Kohli Vs Naveen Kohli) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 505 (Allahabad)

Cruelty – Mental cruelty – Does not depend upon numerical count of such incidents or only on the continuous course of such conduct – It goes by the intensity, gravity and stigmatic impact of it when meted out even once and the deleterious effect of it on the mental attitude necessary for maintaining a conducive matrimonial home. (Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate Vs Neela Vijaykumar Bhate) 2003(1) Apex Court Judgments 677 (S.C.) : 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 487 (S.C.)

Cruelty – Once finding that wife has not treated the husband with cruelty is reversed then husband is not entitled to seek dissolution of marriage on ground of desertion. (Radha Rani Vs Har Bhagwan) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 544 (P&H)

Cruelty – Parties started living together on the basis of compromise in proceedings u/s 10 of the Act for judicial separation – Held, acts of cruelty, if any, stood condoned. (Susheel Kumari Vs Vijay Kumar) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 495 (P&H)

Cruelty – Registration of FIR by wife against husband – FIR not shown to be false – It also not shown that husband has suffered emotionally inducing fear in respect of the matrimonial relationship or that the behavior or behavioural pattern of the other spouse is of such a nature that an inference can be drawn that husband has been subjected to mental cruelty – No inference can be drawn that husband has been subjected to mental cruelty. (Rajesh Kumar Madaan  Vs Mrs.Mamta alias Veena ) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 433 (P&H)

Cruelty – Vague and general allegations regarding quarrels between two sides – Except this nothing brought on record to show that wife caused cruelty to husband in any manner whatsoever – Held, husband is not entitled to decree of divorce on ground of cruelty. (Asha Gupta alias Anju Gupta Vs Rajiv Kumar Gupta) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 106 (P&H)

Cruelty – Wife alleged to have taken away Rs.20,000/- and all her ornaments – As ornaments were of the wife and if she had taken away the ornaments it cannot be said that it amounted to cruelty – Husband having failed to prove theft of money is not entitled to seek dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. (Suresh Kumar Vs Sunita) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 485 (P&H)

Cruelty – Wife alleged to have visited office of husband and that she levelled serious allegations including his having illicit relations with a woman – In support of these allegations none from office of husband examined as a witness – Bald testimony of husband in this respect cannot be accepted. (Asha Gupta alias Anju Gupta Vs Rajiv Kumar Gupta) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 106 (P&H)

Cruelty – Wife consistently stating that she is ready to live with her husband – It is not the case of husband that his wife used to abuse him or hurl abuses upon his family members – Not in evidence that wife did not perform her matrimonial duties and did not behave as a dutiful wife – No sincere effort on the part of husband to settle the wife and the evidence led by husband shows that he only made a pretence of settling the wife without any real intention to do so – Held, it is not a case that amount to cruelty on the part of the wife against the husband. (Ram Mehar Singh  Vs Urmila Kumari) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 659 (P&H)

Cruelty – Wife sole proprietor of company holding 94.5% shares and husband was the employee  – Wife publishing news item that husband was acting against spirit of Article of Association and had caused immense loss of business and good will – Business associates cautioned to avoid dealing with husband alone – Such news item cannot be said to have resulted in lowering down prestige or caused mental cruelty to husband – News item issued to protect the interest of company and to protect the interest of employees and major share holders cannot be said to be illegal or motivated – Decree of divorce annulling marriage cannot be granted on that ground. (Smt.Neelu Kohli Vs Naveen Kohli) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 505 (Allahabad)

Cruelty contemplated as a ground of divorce under the Act is conduct of such type that petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent. (Susheel Kumari Vs Vijay Kumar) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 495 (P&H)

Desertion – Wife given severe beatings and turned out of matrimonial home – Wife ready and willing to reside with the husband – There is no animus deserandi on the part of wife – It is husband who has created such circumstances so as to force wife to leave the matrimonial home – Husband is not entitled to decree of divorce on ground of desertion. (Radha Rani Vs Har Bhagwan) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 544 (P&H)

Divorce – Cruelty – Fraud by wife at time of marriage by not disclosing her true age and her marital status – Wife deliberately suppressed material facts that her ex-husband committed suicide because of harassment meted out to him by her – Wife left house of husband with intention not to come back – Wife of quarreling nature – FIR was also lodged by husband against wife u/ss 490, 420, 120 IPC – Uncontroverted evidence not rebutted by wife – Entirety of facts clearly constituting case of cruelty against husband – Decree of divorce – Held, proper. (Raj Kumari Vs Nandlal) AIR 2002 Rajasthan 345

Divorce – Cruelty – Petition filed by wife – Husband writing repeatedly to police authorities against wife of her having extra marital relations with other persons – Repeated allegations without anything else by themselves amount to cruelty causing reasonable apprehension in the mind of wife that it is dangerous to live with the husband – Decree of divorce passed by trial Court – No interference. (Jai Dayal Vs Shakuntala Devi) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 628 (Delhi)

Divorce – Irretrievable break down of marriage on account of cruelty inflicted by wife on husband – Wife did not contest the petition filed by husband for divorce – Wife did not file any written statement and she did not came before Court to explain her behaviour – Appeal of husband allowed and his marriage with respondent wife dissolved by a decree of divorce. (Jaiprakash Dattatray Patade Vs Mrs.Usha Jaiprakash Patade) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 314 (Bombay)

Divorce petition by husband – Husband assaulted by brothers of wife, maternal uncle and mother – FIR registered u/ss 323 and 506 IPC – All convicted and fined –  There was no allegation against wife – Held, the effect of actions of relations of wife cannot fall on wife. (Radha Rani Vs Har Bhagwan) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 570 (P&H)

Divorce petition by husband on ground of cruelty – Wife lodged FIR u/ss 498-A and 323 IPC against husband – Husband acquitted – Husband did not initiate proceedings for malicious prosecution against wife – Held, merely because wife was not able to prove her allegations beyond a reasonable doubt so as to warrant the conviction does not amount to cruelty. (Radha Rani Vs Har Bhagwan) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 570 (P&H)

Lodging of criminal complaint u/s 406/498-A IPC by wife – Nothing on record to show what was the fate of the case – In absence of any other proof merely lodging of criminal complaint u/ss 406/498-A IPC does not amount to cruelty to the husband. (Asha Gupta alias Anju Gupta Vs Rajiv Kumar Gupta) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 106 (P&H)

Mental Cruelty – Difficult to prove by direct evidence – Inference to be drawn from attending circumstances – Cruelty should be of such a nature so as to cause reasonable apprehension in his or her mind that it would be harmful or injurious to health to live with other party – Instances of misbehaviour not to be considered  in isolation – All facts and circumstances to be taken cumulatively – Uncorroborated allegations of violent temperament, suspecting fidelity, going to office of husband and abusing before colleagues do not constitute mental cruelty. (Pothapragada Sri Lakshmi Maruthi Hara Gopal Vs Smt.P.Seshu Kumari) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 300 (A.P.)

Mental cruelty – Standard of proof under matrimonial cases – Charge not to be established  beyond reasonable  doubt but by preponderance of facts alleged. (Pothapragada Sri Lakshmi Maruthi Hara Gopal Vs Smt.P.Seshu Kumari) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 300 (A.P.)

Parties living separately for 11 years – Not a ground to hold that marriage has irretrievably broken down – Moreover irretrievable break down of marriage is not a ground of divorce under Hindu Marriage Act. (Asha Gupta alias Anju Gupta Vs Rajiv Kumar Gupta) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 106 (P&H)

Divorce petition by husband on ground of cruelty and desertion – Wife alleged to be seeking separate accommodation and that she desired to stay away from the joint family – Wife denied the allegations and made counter-allegations that she was harassed and ill-treated by her husband and his family members – Allegations made by her were vague and there was no date nor other particulars mentioned in respect of any particular incident of harassment – Husband entitled to grant of divorce on ground of cruelty and desertion. (Meena Dinesh Parmar Vs Dinesh Hastimal Parmar) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 321 (Bombay)

Cruelty – Petition by husband – Cruelty can be physical or mental – Ill-treatment and resultant apprehension flowing therefrom must be grave as to make co-habitation unendurable – Onus to prove cruelty is on suing spouse – Standard of proof is no better than in civil proceedings, i.e. fact can be proved by preponderance of probability – Vague allegation of habitual use of vulgar words, humiliation, contemptuous treatment does not amount to proof of cruelty – Husband making such allegation is not entitled to decree of divorce. (B.S.Mohan Kumar Vs Smt.B.K.Nirmala) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 412 (Karnataka)

Desertion – Means permanent intentional abandonment of one spouse by other without consent   and  reasonable cause – It is total repudiation of   obligations of marriage and to bring cohabitation permanently to an end – Husband alleged separation under an agreement giving him liberty to remarry and liberty to wife to live separately and claim maintenance – Would not amount to desertion – Agreement held to be against public policy – Husband cannot take advantage of conditions favorable to him and leave the other conditions not favourable to him – Held, it was husband who  was living away from wife and is not entitled to decree of divorce. (Pothapragada Sri Lakshmi Maruthi Hara Gopal Vs Smt.P.Seshu Kumari) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 300 (A.P.)

Desertion – Two essential conditions are : Factum deserendi and animus deserendi that is the factum of separation and the intention to bring cohabitation permanently to an end. (Rajesh Kumar Madaan  Vs Mrs.Mamta alias Veena ) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 433 (P&H)

Divorce – Desertion – Wife deserted husband for continuous period of 2 years immediately preceding the presentation of petition – Plea of husband that he took his wife at her request to residence of her uncle and she refused to come back in spite of various attempts made by him to bring her back – Evidence in this respect not rebutted – Marriage between parties stands dissolved by decree of divorce. (Shyamsunder Amarlal Hotchandani Vs Smt.Arti alias Sunita Shyamsunder Hotchandani) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 154 (Bombay)

Divorce – Illicit relationship of husband with another woman – No evidence on record to substantiate said plea – Husband also not cross examined on said issue – Mere statement of wife by itself is not sufficient for arriving at conclusion that husband has deserted wife – In absence of evidence finding of trial Court that conduct of husband has resulted in wife leaving matrimonial home is not proper. (Kishan Chand Vs Munni Devi) AIR 2003 Delhi 382

Desertion – For offence of desertion, so far as the deserting spouse is concerned, two essential conditions must be there, namely, (1) the factum of separation; and (2) the intrusion to bring cohabitation permanently to an end, i.e. animus deserendi – Two elements are essential so far as deserted spouse is concerned – (1) the absence of consent; and (2) Absence of conduct giving reasonable cause to the spouse leaving the matrimonial home to form the necessary intention – Burden to prove lies on the petitioner. (B.S.Mohan Kumar Vs Smt.B.K.Nirmala) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 412 (Karnataka)

Desertion – Petition by husband – Accusation by wife against husband that he was having illicit relations with woman and had also child through that woman, proved to be true, husband would not be entitled to decree of divorce on ground of desertion when husband himself was proved to have tried to desert wife and not vice versa. (B.S.Mohan Kumar Vs Smt.B.K.Nirmala) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 412 (Karnataka)

Divorce – Husband seeking divorce on ground of wife suffering from Schizophrenia – Marriage not consummated even in long period of more than six years – Wife not appearing in the witness box to rebut the allegations leveled against her by husband – Wife not producing medical evidence – Parents of wife avoiding to send their daughter to her in-laws’ house – Husband successfully proving that wife was Schizophrenic – Adverse inference cannot be drawn against husband for not examining his parents or grand parents – No error on part of trial Court in drawing adverse inference against wife – As husband had no opportunity to live with life as such there is no question of delay in filing petition for divorce after six years – Wife proved to be of unsound mind and husband is not expected to live with such a wife – Decree of divorce sustained. (Vandana Vs Suresh Charan) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 142 (Rajasthan)

Mental disorder – Mere proof of schizophrenic is not sufficient – Unsoundness of mind must be proved to be of such kind and of such degree that petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the other. (B.N.Panduranga Shet Vs S.N.Vijayalaxmi) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 395 (Karnataka) 

Marriage during minority – Repudiation – Custom prohibiting repudiation of marriage – Custom must be pleaded and proved – In absence of any pleading as to custom, no such argument can be entertained. (Ramesh Kumar Vs Sunita Devi) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 572 (P&H)

Marriage during minority – Repudiation – Not permissible before attaining the age of 15 years and such option is available till attaining age of 18 years. (Ramesh Kumar Vs Sunita Devi) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 572 (P&H)

Cruelty – Wife having extra marital relations – Divorce petition by husband – Allegation not substantiated by husband through any independent and uninterested witnesses – Held, husband is not entitled to decree of divorce. (G.Siddanagappa Vs R.Shailaja) AIR 2004 Karnataka 244

Cruelty and desertion – Husband could not substantiate even one of many acts of cruelty of wife – Husband wants to get rid of wife one way or the other – Appeal of husband – Dismissed. (Jagdeep Singh  Vs Poonam) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 65 (P&H)

Divorce petition by husband – Cruelty – Wife and her relations gave beatings to the husband – Husband sustained injuries on various parts of body and remained admitted in hospital for seven days – Wife never bothered to come back and take care of husband – Wife rightly found to have treated the husband with cruelty – Decree of divorce granted in favour of husband, upheld. (Satyawati alias Savitri Vs Chandi Parshad) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 235 (P&H)

Earlier petition filed within one year of marriage – Pending permission of Court to file such a petition the same withdrawn – Subsequent petition – Not barred – Held, that dismissal of a suit as premature is not a decision on merits and does not operate as res judicata as it cannot be held that the earlier suit which was dismissed as premature had been “heard and finally decided”. (Himanshu Chadha Vs Sangeeta) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 17 (P&H)

Decree of restitution of conjugal rights obtained by wife – Appeal of husband dismissed – Taking advantage of the decree husband filed petition for divorce after one year contending that there had been no cohabitation – Husband in his own evidence admitted that he was not willing to resume cohabitation with his wife – There was non compliance of decree and positive wrong on part of husband – Held, Family Court was right in concluding that there was a legal bar in granting divorce decree. (Ravindra Marutrao Shelar Vs Kalpana Ravindra Shelar) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 437 (Bombay) 

Divorce petition by husband on ground of cruelty – Wife, in turn seeking restitution of conjugal rights – Instances of cruelty alleged by husband not proved – Husband asking wife to stay with other members of family since he does not like her company – By itself amounts to cruelty – Husband not entitled to take advantage of his own wrong – Petition of husband rightly dismissed – Petition of wife rightly allowed. (Yudhishter Singh Vs Smt.Sarita) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 493 (Rajasthan) 

Children – Legitimacy – Marriage during subsistence of first marriage – Second wife lived together under same roof – Marriage though void but children born to them are legitimate. (Kangavalli Vs Saroja) AIR 2002 Madras 73

Second marriage during subsistence of first marriage – Children born out of second marriage are entitled to the benefits of deceased father. (Nallagondla Kanthamma Vs Nallagondala Rajyam & Ors.) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 431 (A.P.)

Void or invalid marriage – Children born out of such marriage – Are entitled to properties of parents and not others – Not entitled to inherit coparcenary property. (Jinia Keotin Vs Kumar Sitaram) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 448 (S.C.)  

Petition by husband for nullity of marriage – Petition by wife for maintenance – Wife sought transfer of petition of husband from place ‘P’ to place ‘B’ where she is residing with her parents – Grounds for transfer are inconvenience and difficulties which wife has to face – Husband is opposing transfer of petition on ground that his witnesses are from that place and it will be inconvenient to secure their presence – Held, presence of witnesses can certainly be secured by incurring necessary expenses and if required by getting the summons issued by Court – Wife has to suffer on account of her child of 5 months old which she has to look after and in the absence of any independent financial support to herself and her child, balance tilts in favour of wife – Petition of husband transferred to Court at place ‘B’. (Anisha Sanjay Hinduja Vs Sanjay Shrichand Hinduja) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 358 (Bombay)

‘Last resided together’ – No particular period is prescribed – Parties last resided together at husband’s father’s place at Nagpur for some period – Husband not having any other separate residence – Held, Court at Nagpur has jurisdiction to entertain petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by husband. (Vaishali Manish Manekar Vs Manish Motiram Manekar) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 224 (Bombay) 

Matrimonial case – Transfer – Convenience of wife is always to be kept in view in the proceedings undertaken by husband – Proceedings u/s 12 of the Act instituted by husband in Court at Ambala transferred to Court at Panchkula. (Deepika Vs Vinod Bhalla) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 596 (P&H)

Petition filed under Hindu Marriage Act, duly verified by petitioner in the manner required by law for the verification of the plaints, is to be treated as substantive evidence. (Ramesh Vs Rajpati) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 156 (P&H)

Matrimonial case – Transfer – S.21-A can be invoked only in relation to transfer of cases filed u/ss 10 and 13 of the Act – S.21-A is not applicable for transfer of proceedings filed u/ss 9 and 13 of the Act. (Rayaprolu Rajya Lakshmi Vs Rayaprolu Ravindranadh Sarma ) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 218 (A.P.)

Maintenance pendente lite – Non payment inspite of Court directions – Amounts to “wrong” under S.23 of the Act – On this ground also respondent/husband is not entitled to decree of divorce. (Amrit Pal Kaur Vs Roshan Lal) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 438 (P&H) 

Reconciliation in execution proceedings cannot be gone into. (Vijay Kumar Vs Neelam Rani) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 239 (Rajasthan)

Maintenance – Quantum – To be fixed keeping in mind the status of parties, capacity of husband to pay, needs of parties and the amount required by the husband or his own maintenance. (Prabhdyal Dhiman Vs Anita Dhiman) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 73 (P&H)

Maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses – Order as to – Revision against –  Application for maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses has no separate existence and cannot stand by itself – Such application cannot exist independently unless lis is there – No appeal lis against the order – Revision also does not lie in view of the amended provision to S.115 CPC. (Ramavtar Vs Smt.Chintamani) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 405 (M.P.)

Maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses – Order as to – Revision against – Not maintainable. (Deepak Arora Vs Jyoti Arora) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 439 (Delhi)

“Educational expenses” – Is included in maintenance under Hindu Adoptions Act and not under Hindu Marriage Act – To claim “educational expenses” remedy is to file application under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. (Lt.Col.Ravee Saharawat Vs Ujjwal Saharawat) AIR 2002 P&H 288

Interim maintenance – Allegation of share of husband in agricultural income and that husband is getting salary of Rs.4000/- per month – Denied by husband – While estimating income of spouse some guess work cannot be ruled out – High Court declined to interfere with maintenance and litigation expenses granted on basis of allegations of sources of income of share in agricultural income and salary. (Nishan Singh Vs Amarjeet Kaur) AIR 2002 Delhi 332

Interim maintenance – Can be granted even when main petition is not likely to succeed. (Mangilal S.Mundada Vs Mangala M.Mundada) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 458 (Bombay)

Interim maintenance – Husband not having sufficient income – Held, as long as husband is capable of earning, there is an obligation on his part to maintain his wife and children. (Padmavathi Vs C.Lakshminarayana) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 607 (Karnataka) 

Interim maintenance – Refusal on ground that wife is unable to support her assertion with help of documentary evidence – Held, even under such circumstances  her evidence cannot be said to be unreliable and unbelievable – In absence of evidence by husband to dispute claim Court is to rely upon evidence of wife and assess husband’s income. (Padmavathi Vs C.Lakshminarayana) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 607 (Karnataka) 

Interim maintenance – Wife educated and can earn – Husband a practising lawyer and not having sufficient income – Not a ground to refuse interim maintenance – Failure of wife to prove that husband is earning Rs.15,000/- p.m. from his professional practice – Also no ground to refuse interim maintenance. (Smt.Padmavathi Vs C.Lakshminarayna) AIR 2002 Karnataka 424

Interim maintenance to children – Can be granted if children are under protection of wife and an application is made by wife. (Smt.Padmavathi Vs C.Lakshminarayna) AIR 2002 Karnataka 424

Maintenance – Application for maintenance pendente lite can be disposed of an affidavits. (Sambit Parija Vs Surita Parija) AIR 2002 Orissa 22

Maintenance – Maintainability of –  In subsequent proceedings when such application dismissed in earlier proceedings – Held, previous dismissal not binding. (Prabhdyal Dhiman Vs Anita Dhiman) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 73 (P&H)

Maintenance – Medical expenses – Can be allowed in an application u/s 24 of the Act. (R.Suresh Vs Smt.Chandra) AIR 2003 Karnataka 183

Maintenance – Turnover of business of husband in crores – Wife earing Rs.6,000/- which was only temporary in nature as she was working against leave vacancy which is no longer available – Rs.80,000/- out of rupees one lac given to her by petitioner spent on litigation – Grant of Rs.20,000/- p.m. as maintenance together with litigation expenses of Rs.15,000/- to wife – Is proper. (Sushil Kumar Gupta Vs Reena Gupta) AIR 2004 Delhi 149

Maintenance pendente lite – Court should consider status and lifestyle of parties while granting maintenance. (Radhika Vs Vineet Rungta) AIR 2004 Delhi 323

Maintenance pendente lite – Discretion lies with the Court to allow maintenance pendente lite either from the date of application or from the date of order or from any other date – Where Court exercises its discretion not to allow maintenance pendente lite from the date of application then Court must record reasons in support thereof. (Popri Bai Vs Treeth Singh) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 262 (Rajasthan)

Maintenance pendente lite – Even if the party is not entitled to claim permanent alimony, she is certainly entitled to claim interim maintenance, till the completion of the proceedings. (Shiva Kumar T.A. Vs Smt.Pushpa Rekha) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 234 (Karnataka) 

Maintenance pendente lite – Grant of relief does not depend upon merits of the petition or on the decision of any particular issue or upon the ultimate success or failure of the petition – Applicant if does not have independent income sufficient for her or his support or necessary expenses of the proceedings, maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings can be allowed. (Shiva Kumar T.A. Vs Smt.Pushpa Rekha) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 234 (Karnataka) 

Maintenance pendente lite – Husband left his job – Husband voluntarily having incapacitated himself from earning, he cannot avoid his liability to maintain his wife and child – Court can legitimately take into consideration his ability to earn reasonable amount in determining amount of maintenance pendente lite. (Rousseau Mitra Vs Shrimati Chandana Mitra) AIR 2004 Calcutta 61

Maintenance pendente lite – No strict procedural norms for disposal of application either only on affidavits of the parties or always by recording their evidence – Application can be disposed of on affidavits if Court thinks that such disposal would afford full and reasonable opportunities to the parties to prove their respective cases – In such a situation Court to record reasons. (Smt.Sebanti Goswami Vs Sagnik Goswami) AIR 2002 Calcutta 48

Maintenance pendente lite – Revision against – Plea of husband that wife is working as a teacher and had independent source of income – Not substantiated by any evidence – Further plea that he had to maintain old mother and 16 years old son – Not tenable as wife also required to maintain herself and 12 years old daughter – Order granting maintenance pendente lite, upheld. (Madan Lal Vs Suman) AIR 2002 P&H 321

Maintenance pendente lite – Sum of Rs.3,000/- per month awarded – In view of the fact that husband made voluntary disclose of income (VDIS) his Income-tax return of Rs.43,000/- not relied upon – Maintenance granted cannot be viewed excessive. (Deepak Arora Vs Jyoti Arora) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 439 (Delhi)

Maintenance pendente lite – Wife is entitled to 1/5th of husband’s total income. (Smt.Laxmi Oram @ Toppo Vs Birsa Oram) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 239 (Orissa) 

Maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses – Service of husband terminated – No evidence produced by husband to prove his income on his dismissal from service – Rejection of application of wife on the ground that wife is educated lady and she cannot sit idle and must be earning – Order set aside – Matter remanded back for decision afresh. (Smt.Chandana Guha Roy Vs Goutam Guha Roy) AIR 2004 Calcutta 36

Medical expenses – Incurred by a dependent spouse can be allowed in an application u/s 24 of the Act. (R.Suresh Vs Smt.Chandra M.A.) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 675 (Karnataka) 

Medical expenses – Treatment taken by wife from private nursing home – Husband Govt. employee – Reimbursement to husband possible only if treatment is taken from specified Govt. hospital – Not a ground to deny medical expenses to wife on this ground. (R.Suresh Vs Smt.Chandra M.A.) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 675 (Karnataka) 

Rejection of application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. – Not a bar to claim maintenance pendente lite. (Joseph Dominic Britto Vs Sampoorna Mary @ Philo) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 182 (Madras)

Interim maintenance – Children – If children are under the protection of wife, Court can take into consideration in awarding maintenance to wife – Court can grant maintenance to children also u/s 26 of the Act. (Padmavathi Vs C.Lakshminarayana) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 607 (Karnataka) 

Maintenance – Divorce by mutual consent – In consent terms wife agreed not to claim alimony/maintenance – Held, such consent terms cannot oust jurisdiction of Court to grant maintenance on application made by wife subsequently – Permanent alimony and maintenance are larger part of right to life and a clause or consent terms providing to contrary would be against public policy. (Geeta Satish Gokarna Vs Satish Shankarraro Gokarna) AIR 2004 Bombay 345

Maintenance – Husband contracting second marriage – First wife is entitled to claim separate residence and maintenance – Fact that earlier wife had refused to join company of husband on his request and as such had deserted her – Not material. (Ashabi B.Takke Vs Bashasab Takke) AIR 2003 Karnataka 172

Maintenance – Lumpsum payment – Difficult for wife in realisation of monthly maintenance of Rs.600/- from husband – In such circumstances husband directed to make lump sum deposit of Rs.60,000/- to be kept in fixed deposit and from its interest wife to maintain herself throughout her life. (Pratima Biswal Vs Amulay Kumar Biswal) AIR 2002 Orissa 125

Permanent alimony – Appeal against decree of divorce pending – Petition u/s 25 is maintainable after passing of decree and pendency of appeal does not preclude wife from filing application u/s 25 of the Act. (Surendra Kumar Bhansali Vs The Judge, Family Court & Anr.) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 194 (Rajasthan)

Permanent alimony – Second marriage during subsistence of first marriage – Second marriage proved to be solemnised according to Hindu Vedic Rites – Both cohabited for about 18 years and two children were born from said wedlock – Wife was forced to leave the matrimonial home on account of cruelty and immoral and unethical behaviour of the husband – Held, wife is entitled to claim maintenance. (Prabhubhai Ranchhodbhai Tailor Vs Mrs.Bhartiben Prabhubhai Tailor) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 286 (Bombay)

Section 25 not attracted in the case of “illegitimate wife” whose marriage is void in view of S.5(i) read with S.11 of Hindu Marriage Act. (Bhausaheb @ Sandu S/o Raghuji Magar Vs Lellabai w/o Bhausaheb Magar) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 128 (Bombay)

Marriage declared as null and void u/s 11 r/w S.5(1) – Maintenance after passing of such a decree – Expression ‘at the time of passing of any decree’ used in S.25 of the Act means all kinds of decrees such as restitution of conjugal rights u/s 9, judicial separation u/s 10, declaring marriage as null and void u/s 11, annulment of marriage as voidable u/s 12 and Divorce u/s 13 of the Act – Held, wife is entitled to maintenance after Court held that marriage was nullity. (Ramesh Chandra Rampratapji Daga Vs Rameshwari Ramesh Chandra Daga) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 396 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 639 (S.C.)

Second marriage of wife – Previous marriage of wife held having not been dissolved by any Court decree – Second marriage in contravention of S.5(i) of the Act declared to be a nullity – Award of maintenance to wife – Wife had not concealed her previous marriage which was alleged to be dissolved by way of a Chor Chhithi – After the second marriage parties lived as husband and wife and had a considerable long married life of about nine years – Held, wife deserves to be granted maintenance u/s 25 of the Act. (Ramesh Chandra Rampratapji Daga Vs Rameshwari Ramesh Chandra Daga) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 396 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 639 (S.C.)

Children – Custody – Second marriage by husband – Second wife pregnant – Father a businessman cannot afford to look after children and monitor their studies – Considering welfare of children their custody should be with mother. (Anita Vs Krishnakuamr) AIR 2003 Bombay 273

Children – Custody – The role of mother is of greater importance than that of a father during the earlier years of a child – It is for the mother to groom children – During pendency of appeal husband remarried who is presently pregnant – Wife more educated than husband – Husband a businessman who cannot afford to look after the children and monitor their studies – Custody given to wife. (Anita Krishnakumar Kachba Vs Krishnakumar Ramchandra Kachba) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 323 (Bombay) 

Disposal of property – Court has jurisdiction to dispose exclusive property of spouses provided it was presented at or about time of marriage. (Hemant Kumar Agrahari & Anr. Vs Smt.Lakshmi Devi & Anr.) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 50 (Allahabad)

Disposal of property – Goods and cash of Rs.75,000/- given at the time of marriage – Value of goods assessed at Rs.1 lac – Husband directed to pay Rs.1 lac as value of goods and also Rs.75,000/- given in cash – Husband also liable to pay interest at 6% from date of judgment to date of actual payment. (Hemant Kumar Agrahari & Anr. Vs Smt.Lakshmi Devi & Anr.) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 50 (Allahabad)

Divorce by mutual consent – Flat in the joint name of husband and wife – Specific admission of husband that wife was to be treated as co – owner – Wife is entitled to equal share in flat – Equitable division of flat if not possible then right to purchase 50% share of other party – If none of the parties ready to purchaser share of other then flat to be put to sale in accordance with law. (Smt.Sunita Shankar Salvi Vs Shankar Laxman Salvi) AIR 2003 Bombay 431

Property – Disposal – Matrimonial Courts have jurisdiction to dispose exclusive property of spouses provided it was presented at or about time of marriage. (Hemant Kumar Agrahari Vs Smt.Lakshmi Devi) AIR 2004 Allahabad 126

First appeal – Limitation – Starts to run from date of judgment and not from the date of decree. (Pradip Kumar Kalita Vs Hiran Prova Kalita) AIR 2002 Gauhati 60

Divorce – Customary divorce – Prevalence of customary divorce in the community to which parties belong contrary to general law of divorce must be specifically pleaded and established by the person propounding such custom. (Subramani & Ors. Vs M.Chandralekha) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 107 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 699 (S.C.)

Adultery – Pleading – Petitioner is required to give particulars as  nearly as he can of the acts of adultery alleged to have been committed by the respondent(s). (Kailash Devi Vs Jai Kishan (Lance Naik) & Anr.) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 87 (P&H)