“Marriage Has Irretrievably Broken Down”: Allahabad HC Upholds Family Court Order That Dissolved Marriage Of Couple Who Lived Separately For 21 Years
The Allahabad High Court dismissed an appeal filed against a Family Court order that dissolved a marriage between a couple who lived separately for 21 years.
The Court was hearing the First Appeal filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, arising from judgment and order whereby the Hindu marriage performed between the parties has been dissolved.
The bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh observed, “Desertion suffered over long years in a young marriage, accompanied with harsh words spoken and complete lack of desire and effort on part of the deserting spouse to cohabit as also lodging of criminal case alleging demand of dowry only after institution of divorce case proceeding by the other spouse and pursuing it in appeal to secure conviction (after initial acquittal) does indicate in any case, the marriage between the parties is irretrievably broken down.”
Advocate Jainendra Kumar Mishra appeared for the Appellant and Advocate K.K. Tripathi appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
The marriage between the appellant and respondent was solemnised in 2000. Initially, the appellant lived briefly at her matrimonial home but expressed discomfort being alone with male family members. The respondent then took her to where he worked, but the Appellant soon left. Despite intermittent cohabitation at various places, the appellant preferred staying at her parental home. The respondent later got himself transferred and moved to a rented accommodation to be closer to her, but the Appellant refused to live with him. A daughter was born to the couple. The appellant filed for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which the respondent has been paying.
The Court noted the stand of the husband who said that he was unable to reconcile his differences with his wife to revive their matrimonial relationship. The further noted his stand that having suffered confinement in jail and having remained suspended from service for two years he was not in a position to revive his matrimonial relationship with the appellant.
The Court concluded that the appellant had no will or desire to live in matrimony with the respondent either at his parental home at his place of work or even otherwise near her work. She only desired to stay at her parental home.
The Court did not find the present case to be fit to provide for permanent alimony.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Arti Tiwari v. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC:143726-DB)
Appearance:
Appellant: Adv. Jainendra Kumar Mishra
Respondent: Adv. K.K. Tripathi, Adv. Pawan Kumar Rao and Adv. Sheo Ram Singh
