Bhuvana Marni
Published on: October 17, 2022 at 23:05 IST
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently granted a man’s request for a divorce after he complained of his wife’s abuse and desertion as well as her filing of false and frivolous cases against him.
While observing that the Husband had previously given the wife Rs. 23 lacs as maintenance during the lawsuit, the bench of Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Nidhi Gupta additionally awarded permanent alimony of Rs. 18 lacs to the wife as a full and final settlement.
“Before parting, even though the parties have lived together in matrimonial home only for nine months, and even though there is no child from their wedlock, and even though during this litigation admittedly the appellant has already paid Rs. 23 lacs to the respondent as maintenance yet, we deem it fit to grant her permanent alimony of a sum of Rs. 18,00,000/- (Rupees eighteen lacs only) as a full and final settlement,” the court ordered
Brief Case:
The husband/appellant filed a petition with the family court according to Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, seeking the dissolution of his marriage with the respondent due to cruelty and desertion.
The case was denied in May 2017 by the Additional District Judge in Patiala. He proceeded to the High Court to contest the same.
He claimed before the High Court that he wed the respondent/wife in November 2012, that after their marriage, they only lived together as husband and wife for a total of 9 months, and that no child was conceived during this union.
The husband argued in his plea that his wife provoked fights without provocation and was abusive toward him and his family.
Furthermore, it was said that she routinely acted haughtily and arrogantly while using foul words.
It was argued that the respondent had deserted the applicant since his wife had left him in September 2013 without giving any explanation and had taken all the dowry items, including those presented to her by the appellant’s parents, with her.
This was more evidence in support of the appellant’s argument.
In response to the accusations of cruelty, the husband said that his wife had made several fictitious complaints against the appellant and his family as well as false complaints to the Army Wives Welfare Association.
The woman, on the other hand, refuted all of the accusations and said that her husband had abandoned her. She said that her spouse beat her ruthlessly, demanded dowry in violation of the law, tortured her, and never paid her maintenance.
Court’s Observation:
The wife made the most objectionable accusations against the appellant and his family (which were unsubstantiated), including the imputations made against her father-in-law that he once behaved inappropriately toward her.
The High Court found fault with the observations and the order of the Family Court at the outset.
“Admittedly, in this case, the respondent has unequivocally admitted in her cross-examination that her complaint against her father-in-law alleging inappropriate behaviour was found to be false by the police, and therefore he was not challenged. However, the learned Court below has not dealt with this aspect at all,” the Court remarked.
Further, the Court took into account the fact that the family court had not factored in certain important facts of the case that showed that the wife had actually meted out cruelty to her husband and had voluntarily deserted him.
“In our view, the conduct of the parties, renders the marriage, as of today, a mere legal fiction. It is not in dispute that the parties are residing separately since 2013. Even mediation attempts between the parties have remained unsuccessful,” the Court remarked as it concluded that with a view to do complete justice and put an end to the agony of the parties, it was required to allow the instant appeal.
Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the impugned order passed by the Additional District Judge, Patiala was set aside; the petition for divorce filed by the husband under Sections 13(ia) and (ib) of the Act was decreed and the marriage solemnized between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce.
Case Title – Ratandeep Singh Ahuja vs. Harpreet Kaur