NISHA vs SOHAN MATAPPFC 82/14 06/01/17 [ Pradeep JJ ].  [ DELHI HIGH COURT ]

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA

• Hindu Marriage Act Section 13 Divorce Cruelty and desertion by wife Desertion is not a withdrawal from a place but from a state of things It is repudiation by one of all obligations of marriage It is abandonment of one spouse by other without any reasonable cause and without consent of other Respondent insulted his wife who was under intense trauma on death of her first child Filing of petition of divorce on false ground and then unilaterally withdrawing it rather adds to cruelty upon other spouse Respondent rather had deserted appellant and even today she has to fight for her maintenance Impugned judgment and decree set aside.

Relevant Paras :

18. Thus, looking at the material which has come on record it is clear that wife had sufficient grounds to live separately. We are of the view that learned Judge, Family Court, Dwarka, has misread the evidence and though the appellant left the matrimonial home, but she never wished to bring her marital ties permanently to an end. The desertion is not to be tested by merely ascertaining which party left the matrimonial home first. If one spouse is forced by the conduct of the other to leave, the desertion could be by such conduct of other spouse and compelled to live separately.

19. In the decision reported as (2010) 4 SCC 476 Ravi Kumar vs Julmidevi the Supreme Court has observed as under:-

“13. It may be noted only after the amendment of the said Act by the amending Act 68 of 1976, desertion per se became a ground for divorce. On the question of desertion, the High Court held that in order to prove a case of desertion, the party alleging desertion must not only prove that the other spouse was living separately but also must prove that there is an animus deserendi on the part of the wife and the husband must prove that he has not conducted himself in a way which furnishes reasonable cause for the wife to stay away from the matrimonial home.”

20. Thus, the facts above do show that appellant was forced by the conduct of the respondent to leave the matrimonial home and that it is the respondent who is guilty of constructive desertion and had made the appellant and her daughter run from pillar to post even for their bare minimum maintenance and had rather failed to prove the behavior of the appellant towards him was such that it ever caused a reasonable apprehension in his mind that it was not safe for him to continue the matrimonial relations with the appellant. The respondent herein had failed to bring his case within the parameters of cruelty and desertion as defined and as such, we set aside the impugned judgment dated November 22, 2013 of the learned Judge, Family Court, Dwarka in HMA No.444/2009 tilted ‘Sohan Singh Nehra vs Nisha Rani’

click here for the judgment 

MRS. NISHA RANI VS SOHAN SINGH NEHRA JUDGMENT DELHI HIGH COURT THE LAW LITERATES

 

All Rights Reserved (Vaibhav Tomar 𝔸𝕕𝕧)