Delhi HC dissolves marriage, says husband viewed his wife only as a 'cash cow'
The bench, also comprising Justice Jasmeet Singh, observed that the husband appeared to be "not interested in nurturing the marriage but only interested in the wife's income".
The Delhi High Court has granted divorce to a couple and dissolved the marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, setting aside a family court's order which rejected the wife's divorce plea.

Citing the husband's materialistic attitude, the court observed that the husband viewed his wife as a "cash cow" and became interested in her only after she got a job with the Delhi Police, said a report by news agency PTI on Sunday.
A bench headed by Justice Vipin Sanghi said the relationship would have brought mental agony and trauma to the wife as the husband did not have any emotional ties with her.
The bench, also comprising Justice Jasmeet Singh, observed that the husband appeared to be "not interested in nurturing the marriage but only interested in the wife's income".
"The continued distance between the parties even after the appellant (wife) attained majority would, in itself, have caused trauma and resulted in cruelty to the appellant apart from everything else... (the) circumstance probabalises the stand of the appellant, that the respondent (husband) harassed the appellant to pocket her income, since he was himself unemployed,” PTI quoted the court as saying.
"The respondent, it appears, viewed the appellant as a cash cow and became interested in her only after she got the job with the Delhi Police. Such brazenly materialistic attitude of the respondent, with no emotional ties, would have in itself caused mental agony and trauma to the appellant sufficient to constitute cruelty to her,” the court added.
The woman sought a divorce on the grounds that the husband was unemployed, an alcoholic and used to physically abuse her and demand money.
According to the PTI report, the marriage was solemnised when the husband and the wife were 19 years old and 13 years old, respectively. The wife was not taken to the matrimonial home until November 2014, that is, when she secured a job with the Delhi Police, said the report further.
The husband opposed the dissolution of marriage on the ground that he funded the woman's education because of which she secured the job.
The court observed that since the wife was living with her parents till 2014, it was "obvious that all her expenses for living and upbringing would have been borne by her parents" and there was nothing to show the contrary.
(With agency inputs)

E-Paper

