The Allahabad High Court held that Cruelty is not defined under the Act yet it has to be an act serious enough as may not allow a prudent person an opportunity or conviction to resolve matrimonial discord being faced by them or as may not burden them to continue to live in matrimony.
Such acts, by very nature must included things or occurrences of very serious nature having deleterious effect on the relationship such as may be seen to prevent the parties to seek reconciliation.
As regarding the allegation of illicit relationship, the Court noted that To infer existence of illicit relationship, it is not to be left to the imagination of the Court what the parties may have intended to say by way of fact allegation. The allegation of one party having illicit relationship with another must be clear.
Brief Facts:
The present appeal was filed against the order of the Family Court vide which the divorce case instituted by the Appellant, under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was dismissed.
Brief Background:
As per both the parties, marriage was not consummated. Since, 2014, parties have not resided together. The ground for divorce was cruelty.
Observations of the Court:
It was noted that the Appellant failed to prove cruelty and further prove that the Respondent was to blame for not consummating the marriage.
It was opined that If courts were to recognize and act on small disputes or occurrences and read them as completion of ingredients of cruelty, many marriages where parties may not be enjoying best relations may stand exposed to dissolution without any real cruelty being committed.
The Bench held that Cruelty is not defined under the Act yet it has to be an act serious enough as may not allow a prudent person an opportunity or conviction to resolve matrimonial discord being faced by them or as may not burden them to continue to live in matrimony. Such acts, by very nature must included things or occurrences of very serious nature having deleterious effect on the relationship such as may be seen to prevent the parties to seek reconciliation.
As regarding the allegation of illicit relationship, the Court noted that To infer existence of illicit relationship, it is not to be left to the imagination of the Court what the parties may have intended to say by way of fact allegation. The allegation of one party having illicit relationship with another must be clear.
The decision of the Court:
Since the parties were having serious disputes and there was no child, the High Court modified the decree and granted judicial separation. Accordingly, appeal was partly allowed.
Case Title: Rohit Chaturvedi v. Smt Neha Chaturvedi
Case No.: FIRST APPEAL No. - 295 of 2020
Coram: Hon'ble Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh, Hon'ble Justice Shiv Shanker Prasad
Advocate for Appellant: Adv. Satish Chaturvedi
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Yogendra Pal Singh
Read More @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
