Can removal of Uterus due to ovarian cancer amount to cruelty to husband for grant of divorce? Madras HC answers
Madras High Court held that the period of treatment the wife has taken from the parental home cannot be termed as desertion.
Madras High Court held that the period of treatment the wife has taken from the parental home cannot be termed as desertion.
“It is evident that the fight inter se the parties was not on any justifiable grounds, but was a war between the egos prompted by the desire to wreak vengeance against the spouse.”
“Alleging character assassination and to say that the husband shall be removed from service and further filing of domestic violence while alleging that the husband is in adultery, fornication, are serious allegations touching the character of respective persons.”
“Any successful marriage is built on mutual respect and faith. If either is compromised beyond a level, the end of the relationship is inevitable as no relationship can stand on half-truth, half-lies, half-respect and half-faith.”
This year was very busy for the Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench as it dealt with the maximum number of cases and decided major matters like Article 370; Same sex marriage; Maharashtra political crisis; and more
“Entire society of the human race needs to change the dialogue at home, which may not promote the fairness preference of skin.”
“In absence of any proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights by either party, the court below ought to have granted a decree for judicial separation by way of alternative relief”
“Additionally, the attempted mediation settlement was also violated by the wife, who only wanted to enjoy the monetary benefits arising out of the settlement but never wanted to fulfil her end of the bargain”
“Considering the undisputed status of wife’s residency in Australia, the provisions of Section 19 of the Act would not come to her rescue.”
“It cannot be stated that the allegations attributed to the husband were completely wrong, but the facts would reveal that the allegations were made on account of the abnormal unexplained behaviour of the husband.”
“It is well settled that in the matrimonial house, the wife should not be treated as hired chattel or a bonded labour to stay under the conditions imposed by the husband.”
Kerala High Court regarded the wife’s email to her husband’s employer as “outcry of a desperate wife, to live with her husband, after bringing him back to normalcy”.
With regards to custody of the child, the Calcutta High Court after considering the paramount welfare of the child, held the husband is not fit person for custody.
“In the Indian context where the husband has chosen to be in a joint family with his parents, he cannot be forced to separate from the first day of his marriage merely on the whims of his wife.”
The impugned order held that the fathers of the parties were real brothers and so, the marriage between the parties fell within the meaning of sub-clause (f) of Section 3 of Hindu Marriage Act, which defines the terms of degrees of prohibited relationships.
In view of the wife’s “conduct and dishonesty”, the Court dismissed revision petition filed by the wife seeking to set aside the order of the Sessions Judge setting aside her monetary maintenance and compensation.
“The child has not only been totally alienated, but has also been used as a weapon against the father. Nothing can be more painful for a parent to see the child drifting away and being totally against the father.”
There is no dispute to the legal position that the spouse is liable to maintain the other spouse and children, however, equity shall be maintained only if one is directed to pay interim maintenance to his/her capacity.
“Family Courts must restrict their considerations to the parameters of the provision of grant of divorce strictly in accordance with the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘Act’). Irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a ground in the Act.”