Merely Because Father In Law Tried To Contribute To His Growth, It Would Not Amount To Interference In His Family Life: Gujarat HC Dismisses Husband’s Appeal
|The Gujarat High Court dismissed the husband’s appeal in a Matrimonial case while noting that merely for the welfare of the family if the wife’s father had at some stage in the life of his son-in-law tried to contribute to the growth of his son-in-law, it would not amount to interference in the family life of the couple to brand it as ‘Cruelty’.
The Court was hearing an Appeal filed by the appellant-husband after he was aggrieved by the judgement and decree passed by the Family Court which dismissed the Family Suit filed by the appellant-husband, under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Nisha M. Thakore observed, “Merely because for the welfare of the family if the father of the respondent had at some stage in the life of son-in-law tried to contribute to the growth of his son-in-law to see that the family remains viable and the marriage survives, in absence of any evidence to the contrary, it cannot be said that this would amount to interference in the family life of the couple so as to brand it as ‘Cruelty’.”
Advocate Narendra Jain appeared for the Appellant and Advocate RD Kinariwala appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
The appellant-husband and respondent married and had a daughter. The appellant claimed their marriage deteriorated due to the respondent’s high living standards, interference from her family, and abusive behaviour, because of which he wants a divorce. He alleged she used vulgar language, restricted his interaction with their daughter, and was pressured by her family to start a business. The respondent denied the claims, accusing the appellant of gambling, abuse, and relying on her father's financial help. After reviewing the evidence, the Family Court dismissed the appellant's case, as it found no proof of cruelty by the wife.
The Court mentioned the decision of the Supreme Court in Gurbux Singh Vs. Harminder Kaur (2010) where according to the Court it was held, “…no uniform standard can be laid down for guidance. There is no reason to suggest on the basis of evidence produced before them that there was a sustained unjustifiable conduct and behaviour of the respondent or the conduct was so reprehensible or indifferent so as to suggest a total departure from normal standard of conjugal kindness.”
The Court said that viewing the marriage life as a whole, the incidents cannot be termed as conduct tantamounting to cruelty on the part of the respondent.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the first Appeal.