Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. – 405 of 2013 Appellant :- Ravindra Pratap Yadav Respondent :- Smt. Asha Devi And Others Counsel for Appellant :- M. Islam,Ahmad Saeed,Azim Ahmad Kazmi

[Hon’ble Suneet Kumar,J. Hon’ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

[ ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT ]

• Hindu Marriage Act, Section 13(1)(i-a) The petition was presented by the husband Dismissal of The plea of husband mainly on the ground that divorce has taken place in the community Panchayat The wife categorically refused to resume co-habitation There is nothing on record to disbelieve the husband’s case as well his uncontroverted evidence Not allowing a spouse for a long time, to have sexual intercourse by his or her partner, without sufficient reason, itself amounts mental cruelty to such spouse There is no acceptable view in which a spouse can be compelled to resume life with the consort Impugned order of the Family Court is quashed and set asideThe marriage petition filed by the husband stands allowed granting decree of divorce Appeal succeeds and is accordingly, allowed.

17. In Vinita Saxena vs. Pankaj Pandit, (2006) 3 SCC 778, on the aspect of mental cruelty the Apex Court made the following observations:
“31. It is settled by a catena of decisions that mental cruelty can cause even more serious injury than the physical harm and create in the mind of the injured appellant such apprehension as is contemplated in the section. It is to be determined on whole facts of the case and the matrimonial relations between the spouses. To amount to cruelty, there must be such wilful treatment of the party which caused suffering in body or mind either as an actual fact or by way of apprehension in such a manner as to render the continued living together of spouses harmful or injurious having regard to the circumstances of the case.
32. The word “cruelty” has not been defined and it has been used in relation to human conduct or human behaviour. It is the conduct in relation to or in respect of matrimonial duties and obligations. It is a course of conduct and one which is adversely affecting the other. The cruelty may be mental or physical, intentional or unintentional. There may be cases where the conduct complained of itself is bad enough and per se unlawful or illegal. Then the [pic]impact or the injurious effect on the other spouse need not be enquired into or considered. In such cases, the cruelty will be established if the conduct itself is proved or admitted.”

18. Since there is no acceptable view in which a spouse can be compelled to resume life with the consort, nothing is given by trying to keep the parties tied forever to a marriage than that has ceased to in fact.
19. From the perusal of plaint and other evidence available on record, we are unable to persuade ourselves to accept the view taken by the court below.
20. In view of the discussion herein above, appeal succeeds and is accordingly, allowed. Impugned order of the Family Court is quashed and set aside. The marriage petition filed by the plaintiff-appellant stands allowed granting decree of divorce.

click here for the judgment

 

FAPL(A)_405_2013 Allahabad High Court- Ravindra Pratap Yadav vs Smt. Asha Devi And Others

 

All Rights Reserved (Vaibhav Tomar 𝔸𝕕𝕧)