An occasional outburst, use of offensive language once in a while cannot be termed as cruelty, a ground for dissolution of marriage, the Punjab and Haryana high court has held.
The high court bench of justice Rajan Gupta and justice Manjari Nehru Kaul dismissed a divorce petition by a Sirsa man, who got married in February 2008 and was in court challenging lower court’s order of dismissal of his divorce plea. The wife had left him in October 2008.
The man had alleged that his wife was of a quarrelsome nature and there was continuous acrimony between them. The wife was also accused of shirking from her matrimonial duties and obligations and being disrespectful not only to his parents but also to him. She would pressurise the husband to move into a separate accommodation and when he would try to reason out with her, she would threaten to commit suicide, the petitioner had claimed, also accusing her of filing false complaints against him to defame him.
The court observed that before ordering dissolution of marriage, a court has to be satisfied that the conduct of one spouse was such that the other could not be expected to continue living with him/her. “However, the allegations levelled by the husband against the wife in the case in hand are totally vague and trivial in nature,” it said, adding that the allegations of the husband that the wife had filed false complaints and made defamatory allegations could not be proved as no documentary evidence was provided by him. There was a petition filed by her under the Domestic Violence Act, but court said it would not constitute cruelty.
{{/usCountry}}The court observed that before ordering dissolution of marriage, a court has to be satisfied that the conduct of one spouse was such that the other could not be expected to continue living with him/her. “However, the allegations levelled by the husband against the wife in the case in hand are totally vague and trivial in nature,” it said, adding that the allegations of the husband that the wife had filed false complaints and made defamatory allegations could not be proved as no documentary evidence was provided by him. There was a petition filed by her under the Domestic Violence Act, but court said it would not constitute cruelty.
{{/usCountry}}The court also found that a petition was filed by wife for restoration of conjugal rights, which court said goes a long way to show that she had been wanting to return to her matrimonial home.
“It is very apparent that the husband himself is responsible for creating adverse circumstances and it is due to his misdeeds alone the wife was forced to stay away from her matrimonial home. He cannot be thus permitted to take advantage of his own wrongs and plead desertion,” the court said, dismissing the plea.
The wife had denied the allegations and submitted that marriage was a lavish affair in which ₹10 lakh was spent. Her in-laws were unhappy with the dowry and had been demanding the same and subjected to both mental and physical cruelty when she couldn’t meet their demands, she said.