Bombay High Court
Harsha Leeladhar Rane vs Leeladhar Sharad Rane on 6 December, 2023
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2023:BHC-AUG:25459-DB
1 FCA14.2019.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 14 OF 2019
Sau. Harsha Leeladhar Rane,
Age : 27 years, Occu. : Household,
R/o. C/o - Laxman Yadav Mahajan,
R/o. 9, K-42/4, Pawannagar, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. ...Appellant
Versus
Leeladhar Sharad Rane,
Age : 33 years, Occu. Service,
R/o. Flat No. 104, Choudhari Residency,
Om Colony No. 2, Bijlinagar, Chinchavad, Pune. ...Respondent
........
Mrs. Seema P. Gaikwad h/f Mr. Ajay G. Talhar - Advocate for the
appellant
Mr. Vijay B. Patil - Advocate for respondent
.........
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL
AND
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 28.11.2023
PRONOUNCED ON : 06.12.2023
JUDGMENT [Per : Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] : -
1. Heard both the sides. Perused the papers on record.
2. This is an Appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955 [hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'] filed by the wife
against the Judgment and Order / Decree dated 05.12.2018 passed
by the Family Court, Aurangabad in Petition No. A-221/2016 filed by
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
2 FCA14.2019.odt
the husband, dissolving the marriage under Section 13 (1) (i-a) of the
said Act.
3. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the Appellant
that the Judgment and Order / Decree impugned in the Appeal is an
ex parte decree without granting proper opportunity to the Appellant.
It is further submitted that during the proceedings filed by the
Appellant under the Domestic Violence Act before the learned
Magistrate and in the Criminal Writ Petition No. 920 of 2017 filed by
the Respondent, the talks of mutual settlement were going on and
the Appellant was told by the Respondent that he will not proceed
with the divorce petition and believing the same, the Appellant did
not attend the proceedings before the Family Court. It is contended
that the Appellant was under the bona fide belief that the matter
would be amicably settled, therefore, she did not file the written
statement and did not contest the divorce proceedings. It is
contended that the Family Court ought to have scanned the evidence
before allowing the divorce petition. It is further contended that
Respondent failed to prove the grounds for dissolution of marriage
and thus, the impugned Judgment and Order / Decree be quashed
and set aside.
4. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the
Respondent that the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act
were filed by Appellant at Aurangabad and the Divorce Petition was
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
3 FCA14.2019.odt
filed by Respondent before the Family Court at Pune, however,
pursuant to the directions by this Court in Miscellaneous Civil
Application No. 127 of 2015, the matter came to be transferred to
Aurangabad and it was directed that the common dates be given in
both the matters. It is submitted that the Appellant was aware of the
proceedings but failed to contest it. It is submitted that the Family
Court has rightly passed the impugned Judgment and Order on the
basis of material available on record and the Appeal be dismissed.
5. The papers on record show that, there is no dispute
between the parties on the following aspects : -
[a] The Appellant and the Respondent got married on
26.04.2012.
[b] They have a son out of the said wedlock.
[c] The Appellant filed the proceedings bearing PWDVA
No. 385/2015 under the Domestic Violence Act before the
Magistrate's Court at Aurangabad against Respondent
and his family members i.e. In-laws.
[d] The Appellant lodged report with the Police against the
Respondent and his family members i.e. In-laws, for the
offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506
r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, which culminated into
filing of the Charge-sheet No. 1549/2015 before the Court
of Magistrate. Respondent and his family members came
to be acquitted in the said R.C.C. No. 1549/2015 by the
Judgment and Order dated 07.07.2021.
[e] Filing of the Divorce Proceedings by the Respondent
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
4 FCA14.2019.odt
before the Family Court at Pune against the Appellant.
[f] Transfer of the Hindu Marriage Petition No. 513 of 2015
(divorce proceedings) from Pune to Aurangabad pursuant
to the decision of this Court in Miscellaneous Civil
Application No. 127 of 2015.
6. The first ground of the Appellant is that, the impugned
Judgment and Order / Decree passed ex parte without granting
proper opportunity to her. Record shows, that the Appellant was
aware of the divorce proceedings filed by Respondent in Pune against
her and she had approached this Court by filing Misc. Civil Application
No. 127 of 2015 for transferring the same to Aurangabad. The divorce
proceeding was registered with the Family Court at Aurangabad as
Petition No. A-221/2016. The Roznama of the divorce proceeding,
after it was transferred to Aurangabad, shows that though on many
dates the Appellant was not present in the proceeding, she was
present on some dates. It further shows that the proceedings were
referred for mediation, however, it failed. The Roznama further shows
that as Appellant did not file her Written Statement, the order to
proceed without Written Statement came to be passed. It further
shows that Respondent filed his evidence affidavit and the matter was
kept for cross-examination. The Roznama dated 20.04.2018 shows
that Appellant was present in the divorce proceedings before the
Family Court on the stage of cross-examination and thereafter it was
kept on 25.07.2018. The Roznama dated 25.07.2018 goes to show
that the brother of Appellant was present and had submitted the
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
5 FCA14.2019.odt
application for adjournment which came to be allowed. The Roznama
dated 03.08.2018 shows that the Appellant was present and no-cross
order came to be passed. The Roznama dated 10.09.2018 shows that
Respondent closed his evidence and the matter was kept for the
Appellant's evidence. The Roznama dated 01.10.2018 shows that the
Appellant was present in the court and last chance was given to the
Appellant to lead her evidence and the matter was kept on
10.10.2018. This clearly goes to show that the Appellant was aware of
the divorce proceedings before the Family Court at Aurangabad.
Undisputedly, the Appellant had not filed any application for setting
aside the order of 'no written statement' and order of 'no-cross'. The
contention of the Appellant that she believed the Respondent that
the matter would be settled and therefore she did not contest the
divorce proceedings before the Family Court, is not acceptable for the
reasons that at the same time she was pursuing the matters filed
before the learned Magistrate at Aurangabad, under the Domestic
Violence Act and the Indian Penal Code. Secondly, the Appellant had
filed the proceeding under the Domestic Violence Act through an
Advocate and also served the legal notice to the Respondent through
an Advocate. Thirdly, she had approached this Court for transferring
the divorce proceedings filed by the Respondent at Pune, to the
Family Court at Aurangabad. This establishes that, the Appellant was
having legal support or assistance or access to seek legal advice in the
matter. She was in a position to solicit advice from the lawyer about
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
6 FCA14.2019.odt
the proceedings in the Family Court matter and could have taken
appropriate steps.
7. The Family Court in the impugned Judgment observed
that the Appellant had filed her appearance in the divorce
proceedings and both the parties were referred to the Marriage
Counsellor for amicable settlement which eventually failed and,
thereafter, Appellant was given ample time / opportunity to file her
Written Statement but she failed and avoided and, therefore, no-cross
order was passed. It is further observed in the impugned Judgment
that the Appellant had attended the counselling and had complete
knowledge of the present proceedings but she chose not to contest
the matter and the Respondent filed his affidavit in lieu of
examination in chief and closed his evidence. It is further observed
that the Appellant failed to appear and cross-examine the
Respondent and further Appellant failed to adduce her evidence. It is
further observed that the Appellant was consistently appearing in the
DV (Domestic Violence) proceedings but failed to appear before the
Family Court. From this factual aspects, it becomes clear that the
Appellant was having every opportunity to contest the divorce
proceedings, however, for the reasons best known to her, she failed to
contest it.
8. The contention of the Appellant that she believed the
Respondent that he will not proceed in the divorce proceedings
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
7 FCA14.2019.odt
appears to be an afterthought. Thus, the contention that the
impugned Judgment and Order / Decree be set aside and the matter
be remanded to the Family Court on the ground that the proceedings
went ex parte is liable to be rejected.
9. Coming to the merit of the case, the Respondent had
instituted the proceedings against the Appellant for divorce under
Section 13 (1) (i-a) of the said Act, which reads thus : -
S. 13 - Divorce (1) Any marriage solemnised, whether before
or after the commencement of this Act, may, on a
petition presented by either the husband or the wife,
be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that
the other party-
(i) ..........
(i-a) has, after the solemnisation of the
marriage, treated the petitioner with
cruelty;
9.1. As the divorce proceeding was filed on the ground of
'cruelty', it is necessary to examine as to what constitutes 'cruelty' in
the eye of law. In A. Jayachandra v. Aneel Kaur, (2005) 2 SCC 22, it is
observed as under : -
10. The expression "cruelty" has not been defined in the Act.
Cruelty can be physical or mental. Cruelty which is a ground
for dissolution of marriage may be defined as willful and
unjustifiable conduct of such character as to cause danger to
life, limb or health, bodily or mental, or as to give rise to a
reasonable apprehension of such a danger. The question of
mental cruelty has to be considered in the light of the norms
of marital ties of the particular society to which the parties
belong, their social values, status, environment in which they
live. Cruelty, as noted above, includes mental cruelty, which
falls within the purview of a matrimonial wrong. Cruelty need
not be physical. If from the conduct of his spouse same is
established and/or an inference can be legitimately drawn
that the treatment of the spouse is such that it causes an
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
8 FCA14.2019.odt
apprehension in the mind of the other spouse, about his or her
mental welfare then this conduct amounts to cruelty. In
delicate human relationship like matrimony, one has to see
the probabilities of the case. The concept, a proof beyond the
shadow of doubt, is to be applied to criminal trials and not to
civil matters and certainly not to matters of such delicate
personal relationship as those of husband and wife.
Therefore, one has to see what are the probabilities in a case
and legal cruelty has to be found out, not merely as a matter
of fact, but as the effect on the mind of the complainant
spouse because of the acts or omissions of the other. Cruelty
may be physical or corporeal or may be mental. In physical
cruelty, there can be tangible and direct evidence, but in the
case of mental cruelty there may not at the same time be
direct evidence. In cases where there is no direct evidence,
Courts are required to probe into the mental process and
mental effect of incidents that are brought out in evidence. It
is in this view that one has to consider the evidence in
matrimonial disputes.
11. The expression 'cruelty' 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. Cruelty is a
course or conduct of one, which is adversely affecting the
other. The cruelty may be mental or physical, intentional or
unintentional. If it is physical, the Court will have no problem
in determining it. It is a question of fact and degree. If it is
mental, the problem presents difficulties. First, the enquiry
must begin as to the nature of cruel treatment, second the
impact of such treatment in the mind of the spouse, whether
it caused reasonable apprehension that it would be harmful
or injurious to live with the other. Ultimately, it is a matter of
inference to be drawn by taking into account the nature of
the conduct and its effect on the complaining spouse.
However, there may be a case where the conduct complained
of itself is bad enough and per se unlawful or illegal. Then the
impact or 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 (See
Sobh Rani v. Madhukar Reddi, AIR 1988 SC 121).
12. To constitute cruelty, the conduct complained of should be
"grave and weighty" so as to come to the conclusion that the
petitioner spouse cannot be reasonably expected to live with
the other spouse. It must be something more serious than
"ordinary wear and tear of married life". The conduct, taking
into consideration the circumstances and background has to
be examined to reach the conclusion whether the conduct
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
9 FCA14.2019.odt
complained of amounts to cruelty in the matrimonial law.
Conduct has to be considered, as noted above, in the
background of several factors such as social status of parties,
their education, physical and mental conditions, customs and
traditions. It is difficult to lay down a precise definition or to
give exhaustive description of the circumstances, which would
constitute cruelty. It must be of the type as to satisfy the
conscience of the Court that the relationship between the
parties had deteriorated to such an extent due to the conduct
of the other spouse that it would be impossible for them to
live together without mental agony, torture or distress, to
entitle the complaining spouse to secure divorce. Physical
violence is not absolutely essential to constitute cruelty and a
consistent course of conduct inflicting immeasurable mental
agony and torture may well constitute cruelty within the
meaning of Section 10 of the Act. Mental cruelty may consist
of verbal abuses and insults by using filthy and abusive
language leading to constant disturbance of mental peace of
the other party.
13. The Court dealing with the petition for divorce on the ground
of cruelty has to bear in mind that the problems before it are
those of human beings and the psychological changes in a
spouse's conduct have to be borne in mind before disposing of
the petition for divorce. However insignificant or trifling, such
conduct may cause pain in the mind of another. But before
the conduct can be called cruelty, it must touch a certain pitch
of severity. It is for the Court to weigh the gravity. It has to be
seen whether the conduct was such that no reasonable
person would tolerate it. It has to be considered whether the
complainant should be called upon to endure as a part of
normal human life. Every matrimonial conduct, which may
cause annoyance to the other, may not amount to cruelty.
Mere trivial irritations, quarrels between spouses, which
happen in day-to-day married life, may also not amount to
cruelty. Cruelty in matrimonial life may be of unfounded
variety, which can be subtle or brutal. It may be words,
gestures or by mere silence, violent or non-violent.
9.2. In Suman Kapur v. Sudhir Kapur, AIR 2009 SC 589, the
expression 'cruelty' under the said Act is dealt with in detail by
considering the previous judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court. In
paragraph no. 34, it is observed thus;
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
10 FCA14.2019.odt
34. Recently, in Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, (2007) 4 SCC 511, this
Court held;
"No uniform standard can ever be laid down for guidance, yet we
deem it appropriate to enumerate some instances of human
behavior which may be relevant in dealing with the cases of
`mental cruelty'. The instances indicated in the succeeding
paragraphs are only illustrative and not exhaustive.
(i) On consideration of complete matrimonial life of the
parties, acute mental pain, agony and suffering as would
not make possible for the parties to live with each other
could come within the broad parameters of mental cruelty.
(ii) On comprehensive appraisal of the entire matrimonial life
of the parties, it becomes abundantly clear that situation is
such that the wronged party cannot reasonably be asked to
put up with such conduct and continue to live with other
party.
(iii) Mere coldness or lack of affection cannot amount to
cruelty, frequent rudeness of language, petulance of
manner, indifference and neglect may reach such a degree
that it makes the married life for the other spouse
absolutely intolerable.
(iv) Mental Cruelty is a state of mind. The feeling of deep
anguish, disappointment, frustration in one spouse caused
by the conduct of other for a long time may lead to mental
cruelty.
(v) A sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment
calculated to torture, discommode or render miserable life
of the spouse.
(vi) Sustained unjustifiable conduct and behavior of one spouse
actually affecting physical and mental health of the other
spouse. The treatment complained of and the resultant
danger or apprehension must be very grave, substantial and
weighty.
(vii) Sustained reprehensible conduct, studied neglect,
indifference or total departure from the normal standard of
conjugal kindness causing injury to mental health or
deriving sadistic pleasure can also amount to mental
cruelty.
(viii) The conduct must be much more than jealousy, selfishness,
possessiveness, which causes unhappiness and
dissatisfaction and emotional upset may not be a ground
for grant of divorce on the ground of mental cruelty.
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
11 FCA14.2019.odt
(ix) Mere trivial irritations, quarrels, normal wear and tear of
the married life which happens in day to day life would not
be adequate for grant of divorce on the ground of mental
cruelty.
(x) The married life should be reviewed as a whole and a few
isolated instances over a period of years will not amount to
cruelty. The ill-conduct must be persistent for a fairly
lengthy period, where the relationship has deteriorated to
an extent that because of the acts and behavior of a
spouse, the wronged party finds it extremely difficult to live
with the other party any longer, may amount to mental
cruelty.
(xi) If a husband submits himself for an operation of
sterilization without medical reasons and without the
consent or knowledge of his wife and similarly if the wife
undergoes vasectomy or abortion without medical reason
or without the consent or knowledge of her husband, such
an act of the spouse may lead to mental cruelty.
(xii) Unilateral decision of refusal to have intercourse for
considerable period without there being any physical
incapacity or valid reason may amount to mental cruelty.
(xiii) Unilateral decision of either husband or wife after marriage
not to have child from the marriage may amount to cruelty.
(xiv) Where there has been a long period of continuous
separation, it may fairly be concluded that the matrimonial
bond is beyond repair. The marriage becomes a fiction
though supported by a legal tie. By refusing to sever that
tie, the law in such cases, does not serve the sanctity of
marriage; on the contrary, it shows scant regard for the
feelings and emotions of the parties. In such like situations,
it may lead to mental cruelty".
9.3. In Vishwanath Sitaram Agrawal v. Sau. Sarla
Vishwanath Agrawal, AIR 2012 SC 2586, the term 'cruelty' is
considered and in paragraph no. 18, it is observed as follows : -
18. In Shobha Rani v. Madhukar Reddi, while dealing with 'cruelty'
under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act, this Court observed that the
said provision does not define 'cruelty' and the same could not be
defined. The 'cruelty' may be mental or physical, intentional or
unintentional. If it is physical, the court will have no problem to
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
12 FCA14.2019.odt
determine it. It is a question of fact and degree. If it is mental, the
problem presents difficulty. Thereafter, the Bench proceeded to
state as follows: -
"First, the enquiry must begin as to the nature of the cruel
treatment. Second, the impact of such treatment on the
mind of the spouse. Whether it caused reasonable
apprehension that it would be harmful or injurious to live
with the other. Ultimately, it is a matter of inference to be
drawn by taking into account the nature of the conduct and
its effect on the complaining spouse. There may, however,
be cases where the conduct complained of itself is bad
enough and per se unlawful or illegal. Then the 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."
9.4. In U. Sree v. U. Srinivas, AIR 2013 SC 415, the term
'cruelty' has been discussed. The relevant paragraphs are reproduced
below.
20. In Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh[14], a three-Judge Bench, after
dealing with the concept of mental cruelty, has observed thus:-
"99. ... The human mind is extremely complex and human
behaviour is equally complicated. Similarly human ingenuity has
no bound, therefore, to assimilate the entire human behaviour in
one definition is almost impossible. What is cruelty in one case
may not amount to cruelty in the other case. The concept of
cruelty differs from person to person depending upon his
upbringing, level of sensitivity, educational, family and cultural
background, financial position, social status, customs, traditions,
religious beliefs, human values and their value system.
100. Apart from this, the concept of mental cruelty cannot
remain static; it is bound to change with the passage of time,
impact of modern culture through print and electronic media and
value system, etc. etc. What may be mental cruelty now may not
remain a mental cruelty after a passage of time or vice versa.
There can never be any straitjacket formula or fixed parameters
for determining mental cruelty in matrimonial matters. The
prudent and appropriate way to adjudicate the case would be to
evaluate it on its peculiar facts and circumstances...."
21. In Ravi Kumar v. Julmidevi[15], this Court has expressed thus: -
"In matrimonial relationship, cruelty would obviously mean
absence of mutual respect and understanding between the
spouses which embitters the relationship and often leads to
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
13 FCA14.2019.odt
various outbursts of behaviour which can be termed as cruelty.
Sometime cruelty in a matrimonial relationship may take the
form of violence, sometime it may take a different form. At
times, it may be just an attitude or an approach. Silence in some
situations may amount to cruelty.
20. Therefore, cruelty in matrimonial behaviour defies any
definition and its categories can never be closed. Whether the
husband is cruel to his wife or the wife is cruel to her husband
has to be ascertained and judged by taking into account the
entire facts and circumstances of the given case and not by any
predetermined rigid formula. Cruelty in matrimonial cases can be
of infinite variety--it may be subtle or even brutal and may be by
gestures and words."
22. Recently, this Court, in Vishwanath Agrawal, s/o Sitaram
Agrawal v. Sarla Vishwanath Agrawal[16], while dealing with the
conception of cruelty, has stated that it has inseparable nexus
with human conduct or human behaviour. It is always dependent
upon the social strata or the milieu to which the parties belong,
their ways of life, relationship, temperament and emotions that
have been conditioned by the social status. The two-Judge Bench
referred to the decisions in Sirajmohmedkhan Janmohamadkhan
v. Hafizunnisa Yasikhan[17], Shobha Rani (supra), Sheldon v.
Sheldon[18], V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat[19], Parveen Mehta (supra),
Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate v. Neela Vijaykumar Bhate[20], A.
Jayachandra v. Aneel Kaur[21], Vinita Saxena v. Pankaj
Pandit[22], Samar Ghosh (supra) and Suman Kapur v. Sudhir
Kapur[23], and opined that when the evidence brought on record
clearly establish a sustained attitude of causing humiliation and
calculated torture on the part of the wife to make the life of the
husband miserable, it would amount to mental cruelty. Emphasis
was laid on the behavioral pattern of the wife whereby a dent is
created in the reputation of the husband, regard being had to the
fact that reputation is the salt of life.
10. Coming to the case in hand, the observations made by the
Family Court in the impugned Judgment and Order shows that the
Respondent had filed the said divorce proceedings with the case that
after the marriage, when both of them went to reside at Pune where
he was working for earning, Appellant used to refuse to do the
household work; she used to inquire by asking many questions when
he used to come late at home; she used to demand expensive mobile
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
14 FCA14.2019.odt
phones, ornaments etc.; she used to pick up quarrels with him after
the phone calls with her family members and used to bang her head
on the wall; during the pregnancy she used to threaten him by saying
that she would cut her wrist; she insulted her in-laws by saying that
they gave less money to their child and had not given the gold chain;
during the Diwali festival she fought with him and said that she did
not want to stay in his house and he should drop her to her parents
house; she locked herself in a room when he informed her parents
that she quarreled with him as he could not come to Aurangabad since
he had no holidays; on 28.10.2014 her parents came to his house at
Dharangaon and started abusing him and gave threats that they
would file false case against him; she went to her parental home with
all her articles and ornaments and refused to come back; his request
to come back was neglected; on 09.02.2015 when he went to
Aurangabad to see the child and bring her back to his house her
parents quarreled with him and drove him out of the house; on
22.03.2015 when he and his parents went to Aurangabad she lodged
the non-cognizable complaint against them with the CIDCO Police
Station, she lodged report against him and his family members with
the Bhorgaon Leva Panchayat, Tal. Yawal, Dist. Jalgaon; on 04.03.2015
he attended the panchayat twice which had lowered his reputation
and that of his family members; he sent notice to her on 25.03.2015
and requested to resume cohabitation to which she replied through
an advocate on 10.04.2014 making allegations that he was having
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
15 FCA14.2019.odt
illicit relations with his sister-in-law and sent the said reply to the
address of his brother at Dharangon; she filed the proceedings under
the D.V. Act wherein the same allegations of illicit relations were
made; she did not allow him to meet his child and deserted him
without any reason and it caused him the mental cruelty.
11. The impugned Judgment and Order shows that the
Respondent filed his affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief at Exh.42,
reiterating his contentions made in the divorce petition which went
unchallenged. The impugned order shows the documents such as the
legal notice sent by him to the Appellant and the reply notice sent by
the Appellant, certified copy of affidavit of Appellant's evidence in DV
case along with the cross-examination, xerox copy of the summons
issued by the Caste Panchayat, Bhorgaon, certified copy of the written
complaint made to the Police, the certified copy of Exh.1 in RCC No.
1549/15 with order etc., were filed by the Respondent.
12. The impugned Judgment and Order shows that the Family
Court observed that the documents support the case of the
Respondent and it was established that the Appellant was doubting
the character of the Respondent by linking his name with the sister-in-
law and made baseless allegations in the reply. It is further observed
by the Family Court that the Appellant did not stop making allegations
but also repeated them in her reply to the notice and intentionally
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
16 FCA14.2019.odt
sent it on the address of brother and sister-in-law of the Respondent
so as to cause agony and pain. The learned Family Court also observed
that the Appellant made complaints against the Respondent and his
family members with the Police Station and also before the Caste
Panchayat wherein the Respondent was summoned and he was
required to attend the proceedings of Domestic Violence Act. The
Family Court further observed that the repeated allegations of
Appellant in the reply notice, in the D.V. proceedings and in her non-
cognizable complaint caused mental cruelty to the Respondent as the
said allegations have not been proved by the Appellant. The learned
Family Court recorded its conclusion that all the averments of the
Respondent made in the petition and his evidence affidavit remained
uncontroverted and have no reason to disbelieve them and accepting
the case of the Respondent that the Appellant has treated him with
cruelty and granted the decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty.
13. On going through the the papers on record, it is seen that
the learned Family Court took into consideration the entire material
available before it and reached the aforesaid conclusion. Applying the
principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in respect of "cruelty"
as observed above, to the facts of the case in hand, we do not see any
reason to take a different view than the one taken by the Family
Court. We concur with the observations of the Family Court that the
Respondent has been able to make out a case of cruelty meted out to
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 16:48:00 :::
17 FCA14.2019.odt
him by the Appellant. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we
find no infirmity in the impugned Judgment and Order, which is based
on the unchallenged material placed before the Family Court. Having
regard to the aforesaid, the following order is passed.
ORDER
[i] The Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
[ii] Decree be drawn up accordingly.
[NEERAJ P. DHOTE] [MANGESH S. PATIL]
JUDGE JUDGE
SG Punde
