Case Note & Summary
The appellant-husband filed a divorce petition under Sections 13(1)(i-b) and 13(1A) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, before the Family Court, Krishnagiri, seeking dissolution of his marriage with the respondent-wife, solemnized on 19.06.2011. The husband alleged that the wife insisted on a separate matrimonial home, demanded money, refused sexual intercourse, threatened to cut his private parts, and caused mental cruelty. The wife denied all allegations and stated that she took care of the family and that the husband failed to provide maintenance. The trial court dismissed the petition, holding that the husband failed to prove cruelty. The husband appealed to the High Court. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of PW-1 (husband), PW-2, and RW-1 (wife), and documents Exs.P1 to P6. The court noted that the parties lived together until May 2018 and had two children. The court found that the husband's allegations were not corroborated and that the wife's denial was credible. The court held that the husband failed to establish cruelty or desertion as grounds for divorce. The appeal was dismissed, and the trial court's order was confirmed.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Divorce - Cruelty - Section 13(1)(i-a) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - The husband sought divorce on grounds of cruelty alleging that the wife refused sexual intercourse, demanded money, and threatened to cut his private parts. The trial court dismissed the petition. On appeal, the High Court held that the allegations were not sufficiently proved and that the husband failed to establish cruelty. The court noted that the parties lived together until May 2018 and had two children, and the wife's denial of allegations was credible. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 2-11) B) Family Law - Divorce - Desertion - Section 13(1)(i-b) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - The husband also pleaded desertion, but the court found that the wife did not desert the husband; rather, the husband left the matrimonial home. The court held that desertion was not established. (Paras 6-11) C) Evidence - Burden of Proof - In matrimonial proceedings, the burden is on the petitioner to prove the grounds for divorce. The court found that the husband's evidence was insufficient and that the wife's counter-affidavit and testimony were credible. (Paras 8-11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the husband has established cruelty as a ground for divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and whether the trial court's dismissal of the divorce petition was correct.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The order dated 23.10.2021 in O.P.No.385 of 2019 on the file of the Family Court, Krishnagiri, is confirmed.
Law Points
- Cruelty under Hindu Marriage Act
- 1955
- Section 13(1)(i-a) requires proof of conduct that causes reasonable apprehension of harm or injury to life
- limb
- or health
- mere allegations of refusal of sexual intercourse or threats without corroboration do not constitute cruelty
- burden of proof lies on petitioner
- appellate court will not interfere with findings of fact unless perverse.
