Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Section 13(1)(ia)—Cruelty—What constitute—Expression “cruelty” envisaged under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act has a fluid nature and lacks an exhaustive definition—Concept is inherently flexible and must be construed in the context of the facts and circumstances of each individual case—What may constitute cruelty in one matrimonial relationship may not, in another—Determination necessarily depends on the social milieu, temperament, and background of the parties—Court, while exercising its judicial discretion, is required to examine whether the conduct complained of, when viewed cumulatively and in its overall setting, is of such nature and gravity as to cause mental or physical suffering sufficient to destroy the legitimate expectations of marital life—Consistent line of decisions of the Apex Court recognise that cruelty is not confined to acts of physical violence alone but extends equally to conduct that inflicts mental pain, emotional distress, or humiliation upon the aggrieved spouse—Emphasis is not merely on the act itself but on its cumulative impact on the other spouse and the extent to which such conduct renders continued cohabitation intolerable.
[Para 37 & 38]
Section 13(1)(ia)—Grant of divorce in favour of husband on ground of cruelty—Appeal—Refusal by appellant-wife to consummate the marriage and subsequent desertion of the matrimonial home, leading to the crumbling of the marriage after a month of its solemnization—False allegations and criminal complaints against respondent-husband as well as his family, causing mental harassment and distress—Consistent aggravated acts, which were not just ordinary wear and tear, carried out by appellant-wife during the brief period, resulting in projecting the respondent-husband in a bad light, not only in front of his relatives but also in the professional setting—When appellant-wife’s conduct is viewed in its entirety, from her premature withdrawal from matrimonial home to subsequent institution of multiple unsubstantiated proceedings and humiliating acts, it is evident that continued cohabitation had become unreasonable and intolerable—Conclusions reached by the Family Court are based on a sound appraisal of record and are in consonance with settled judicial principles defining mental cruelty between spouses—Appeal dismissed.
[Para 46 to 57]