Small Disputes Or Occurrences Cannot Be Treated As 'Cruelty' For Granting Divorce: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court observed that small disputes and occurrences should not be treated as 'cruelty' for granting divorce.
The Court was considering an appeal against a judgment of Family Court dismissing a divorce case filed by the husband.
A Division Bench of Justice Shiv Shanker Prasad and Justice S.D. Singh held 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."
Advocate Satish Chaturvedi appeared for the Appellant and Advocate Yogendra Pal Singh appeared for the Respondent.
The Court found that while the marriage was unconsummated, the blame couldn't be conclusively placed on the respondent. The Court considered the events where a mob was allegedly instigated by the respondent. The Court emphasized that the alleged acts did not meet the threshold for cruelty required for a divorce decree.
The Court emphasized that cruelty, for the purposes of granting a divorce, must be of a serious nature, having a deleterious effect on the relationship, and preventing reconciliation. It concluded that the allegations were not sufficient to establish cruelty.
The Court said, “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.”
However, the Court recognized the lack of a healthy relationship between the parties, the absence of reconciliation efforts, and the occurrence of an event. Despite finding no grounds for divorce, the Court modified the decree, granting a decree of judicial separation under Section 13A of the Act, considering the circumstances after ten years of unconsummated marriage.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court said, “In such facts, we find limited interference is required to be made at this stage in as much as ten years have passed since the marriage was solemnized between the parties. They have not cohabited form more than nine years now. There is no child born to the marriage and there is no hope seen existing of any reconciliation today.”
Click here to read/download Order