Divorce – Petition by husband on ground of cruelty and desertion – Failure to prove the grounds – High Court in appeal dissolved the marriage on payment of Rs.10 Lakhs by husband to wife – Held, marriage under Hindu Act can be dissolved only on any of the grounds as enumerated u/s 13 of the Act – Law does not permit the purchase of a decree of divorce for consideration, with or without the consent of the other side – No court can assume jurisdiction to dissolve a Hindu marriage simply on the basis of the consent of the parties de hors the grounds enumerated u/s 13 of the Act, unless of course the consenting parties proceed u/s 13-B of the Act. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 921 (S.C.)
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.13(1)(i-a) – Cruelty – A particular conduct may amount to cruelty in one case but the same conduct necessarily may not amount to cruelty due to change of various factor, in different set of circumstances. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 724 (S.C.)
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.13(1)(i-a) – Cruelty – Even a single act of violence which is of grievous and inexcusable nature satisfies the test of cruelty. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 724 (S.C.)
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.13(1)(i-a) – Cruelty – Ill conduct – Must be precedent for a fairly lengthy period where the relationship has deteriorated to an extent that because of the acts and behaviour of the spouse, one party finds it extremely difficult to live with the other. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 724 (S.C.)
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.13(1)(i-a) – Cruelty – Making certain statements on the spur of the moment and expressing certain displeasure about the behaviour of elders may not be characterized as cruelty. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 724 (S.C.)
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.13(1)(i-a) – Cruelty – Mere trivial irritations, quarrels, normal wear and tear of married life which happens in day to day life in all families would not be adequate for grant of divorce on the ground of cruelty – Sustained unjustifiable and reprehensible conduct affecting physical and mental health of the other spouse may lead to mental cruelty. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 724 (S.C.)
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.13(1)(i-a) – Cruelty – Persistence in inordinate sexual demands or malpractice by either spouse can be cruelty if it injures the other spouse. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 724 (S.C.)
Live in relationship – Mere live in relationship does not entitle a woman to benefits of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act – She has to show that relationship was in the nature of marriage. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 775 (S.C.)
Plaintiff can seek impleading of a party as defendant on the ground that he is a necessary party – If claim against such person is barred by limitation, it may refuse to add him as a party and even dismiss the suit for non joinder of a necessary party. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 295 (S.C.)
Plea of res judicata does not include a plea of bar under O.2.R.2 CPC – Two pleas are different and one does not include the other. 2010(3) Apex Court Judgments 545 (S.C.)
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Section 2(f), 2(s) & 20(3) – Man and woman not married but having live in relationship – Held, mere live in relationship will not entitle women to benefits of Act – She has to show that relationship was in the nature of marriage – ‘Relationship in the nature of marriage’ must fulfill the following ingredients : (a) The couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses; (b) They must be of legal age to marry; (c) They must be otherwise qualified to enter into legal marriage including being unmarried; (d) They must have voluntarily co-habited and held themselves out to the world as being akin to spouses for a significant period of time; (e) The parties must have lived together in a shared household as defined in Section 2(s) of the Act – Merely spending weekends together or a one night stand would not make it a domestic relation; (f) If a man has a ‘keep’ whom he maintains financially and uses mainly for sexual purpose and/or as a servant it would not be a relationship in the nature of marriage. 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 775 (S.C
