Read Time: 07 minutes
Court said that the finding of cruelty was a substantial reason for the husband not to continue living with the wife, which should have led the family court to grant the divorce and dismiss the wife's suit for restitution of conjugal rights
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court recently overturned a family court's decision that dismissed a husband's suit for divorce while allowing his wife's suit for restitution of conjugal rights, despite clear evidence of cruelty inflicted upon the husband by the wife during their marriage.
A division bench comprising Justices Rajan Roy and Om Prakash Shukla, emphasized the inconsistency in the family court's judgment. Court noted that the family court had acknowledged the cruelty inflicted on the husband, however, instead of granting the divorce, the family court had incongruously decreed in favor of the wife's suit for the restitution of conjugal rights.
Court stated, "Instead of allowing the suit for divorce, it has decreed the suit of the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights which is apparently incongruous and irreconcilable with finding on the issue of cruelty recorded in the context of the suit for divorce in favour of the appellant/husband and against the wife. This finding itself constituted a valid ground and a reasonable cause within the meaning of Section 9 of the Act, 1955 for the husband not to live with the respondent and for the Family Court to dismiss the suit of the wife under Section 9 of the Act, 1955".
Court highlighted that the finding of cruelty was a substantial reason for the husband not to continue living with the wife, which should have led the family court to grant the divorce and dismiss the wife's suit for restitution of conjugal rights.
The couple got married on November 27, 1986, and two sons were born out of the wedlock. The husband alleged that after the birth of their children, his wife began to behave cruelly towards him. The allegations included locking him in the toilet, making unfounded accusations of infidelity, abusing his parents in front of their children, and refusing to accompany the family on trips.
On April 28, 2012, the husband filed for divorce. Following this, the wife filed multiple cases against him, including allegations of domestic violence and demands for maintenance. She also filed a suit for the restitution of conjugal rights.
The family court, after hearing both parties and reviewing the evidence, though partially upheld the husband's claims of cruelty but did not find sufficient evidence of desertion. It ruled in favor of the wife, stating that the husband had withdrawn from her society without a valid reason.
As a result, the family court dismissed the husband's divorce petition and decreed the restitution of conjugal rights in favor of the wife.
The husband appealed against the family court’s judgment before the high court. His counsel argued that once cruelty was established, the court should have granted the divorce and dismissed the suit for restitution of conjugal rights.
The high court noted that the finding of cruelty was not challenged by the wife. It found that the family court's finding of cruelty against the husband was clear and categorical. Given this finding, the logical outcome should have been to grant the divorce, the high court held.
The division bench asserted that if cruelty is proven, the spouse guilty of cruelty is not entitled to restitution of conjugal rights.
Case Title: Dr. Bijoy Kundu v. Smt. Piu Kundu and Connected matter
Please Login or Register
