Apex Law Journal
Apex Law Journal
An online law journal reporting latest and important judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.                                                                                                                         Click here to get free legal updates via email                                                                                                                          Click here to download forms (Address Form, List Of Documents and Memorandum Of Appearance)
User Name :
Password :
New Subscriber
Forgot Password
 

Editor

Neha Goel, Advocate

Advisory Board

S.C. Khunger, Advocate

Rohit Bansal, Advocate

Varinder Singh Kanwar, Advocate

Hittan Nehra, Advocate

Judgments on Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Saturday, November 17, 2012
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1) (ia) — Cruelty — During the pendency of the divorce petition wife got published in a newspaper a notice stating, inter alia, that the husband is a womanizer and is addicted to liquor — Held, such a publication in the newspaper having good circulation can cause trauma, agony and anguish in the mind of any reasonable man — The explanation given by the wife to the effect that she wanted to protect the interests of the children is absolutely incredible and implausible.  

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1) (ia) — Cruelty — The expression ‘cruelty’ has an inseparable nexus with human conduct or human behavior — It is always dependent upon the social strata or the milieu to which the parties belong, their ways of life, relationship, temperaments and emotions that have been conditioned by their social status.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1) (ia) — Cruelty — Wife had publicised in the newspapers that the husband was a womaniser and a drunkard — She had made wild allegations about his character — She had made an effort to prosecute him in criminal litigations which she had failed to prove — Held, the feeling of deep anguish, disappointment, agony and frustration of the husband is obvious — It can be stated with certitude that the cumulative effect of the evidence brought on record clearly establish a sustained attitude of causing humiliation and calculated torture on the part of the wife to make the life of the husband miserable — The husband felt humiliated both in private and public life — Indubitably, it created a dent in his reputation which is not only the salt of life, but also the purest treasure and the most precious perfume of life — It is extremely delicate and a cherished value this side of the grave — It is a revenue generator for the present as well as for the posterity — Thus analysed, it would not be out of place to state that his brain and the bones must have felt the chill of humiliation — The dreams sweetly grafted with sanguine fondness with the passage of time reached the Everstine disaster, possibly, with a vow not to melt — The cathartic effect looked like a distant mirage — The cruel behaviour of the wife has frozen the emotions and snuffed out the bright candle of feeling of the husband because he has been treated as an unperson — Thus, analysed, it is abundantly clear that with this mental pain, agony and suffering, the husband cannot be asked to put up with the conduct of the wife and to continue to live with her — Therefore, he is entitled to a decree for divorce.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13 — Divorce — Subsequent events can be taken into consideration.

 
Friday, August 26, 2011
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 11 read with Section 5(1) — Held, Section 11 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 declares that a second marriage by a husband, who has living wife, with another woman is void, for breach of Section 5 (i) of the said Act, it brings/attaches several legal disabilities to the woman with whom second marriage is performed — Say for example, she would not be entitled to claim maintenance from her husband even if she is inhumanly treated, subjected to mental and physical cruelty of variety of kinds etc. and is not able to maintain herself — Law of inheritance would prejudicially operate against her — She herself would suffer outrageous, wrong and absurd social stigma of being another woman in the life of the male who contracts second marriage with her — The members of the cruel society including her kith and kin like parents, brother, sister etc. would look down upon her and she would be left in lurch by one and all.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Sections 11 and 17 — Indian Penal Code, 1860, Secton 494 — Void marriage — Declaration of nullity of marriage — Until the declaration contemplated by Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act is made by a competent Court, the woman with whom second marriage is solemnized continues to be the wife within the meaning of Section 494 IPC and would be entitled to maintain a complaint against her husband. 

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 11 — Void marriage — Declaration of nullity of marriage — Though the law specifically does not cast obligation on either party to seek declaration of nullity of marriage and it may be open to the parties even without recourse to the Court to treat the marriage as a nullity, such a course is neither prudent nor intended and a declaration in terms of Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act will have to be asked for, for the purpose of precaution and/or record.

 
Monday, August 08, 2011
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 25 — Permanent alimony and maintenance — While considering the claim for permanent alimony and maintenance of either spouse, the respondent’s own income and other property, and the income and other property of the applicant are all relevant material in addition to the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case — It is further seen that the court considering such claim has to consider all the above relevant materials and determine the amount which is to be just for living standard — No fixed formula can be laid for fixing the amount of maintenance — It has to be in the nature of things which depend on various facts and circumstances of each case — The court has to consider the status of the parties, their respective needs, the capacity of the husband to pay, having regard to reasonable expenses for his own maintenance and others whom he is obliged to maintain under the law and statute — The courts also have to take note of the fact that the amount of maintenance fixed for the wife should be such as she can live in reasonable comfort considering her status and mode of life she was used to live when she lived with her husband — At the same time, the amount so fixed cannot be excessive or affect the living condition of the other party.

 
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B(2) — Whether the consent once given in a petition for divorce by mutual consent can be subsequently withdrawn by one of the parties after the expiry of 18 months from the date of the filing of the petition in accordance with Section 13B (1) of the Act? — Held, yes.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B(2) — Divorce by mutual consent — Consent not withdrawn within a period of 18 months — Court, held, is not bound to grant divorce — Eighteen month period is specified only to ensure quick disposal of cases of divorce by mutual consent, and not to specify the time period for withdrawal of consent.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B(2) — Divorce by mutual consent — Withdrawal of consent — Eighteen month period, held, is specified only to ensure quick disposal of cases of divorce by mutual consent, and not to specify the time period for withdrawal of consent.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B — Divorce by mutual consent — One of the parties may withdraw their consent at any time before the passing of the decree.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B(2) — Divorce by mutual consent — If the second motion is not made within the period of 18 months, then the Court is not bound to pass a decree of divorce by mutual consent.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B(2) — Divorce by mutual consent — The Court is bound to pass a decree of divorce declaring the marriage of the parties before it to be dissolved with effect from the date of the decree, if the following conditions are met: 

 

 a. A second motion of both the parties is made not before 6 months from the date of filing of the petition as required under subsection (1) and not later than 18 months; 

 

 b. After hearing the parties and making such inquiry as it thinks fit, the Court is satisfied that the averments in the petition are true; and 

 

 c. The petition is not withdrawn by either party at any time before passing the decree.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B — Divorce by mutual consent — The most important requirement for a grant of a divorce by mutual consent is free consent of both the parties — In other words, unless there is a complete agreement between husband and wife for the dissolution of the marriage and unless the Court is completely satisfied, it cannot grant a decree for divorce by mutual consent — Otherwise, in our view, the expression ‘divorce by mutual consent’ would be otiose.

 
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 — Section 16(3) — Constitution of India, 1950, Article 39(f) — Article 39 (f) must be kept in mind by the Court while interpreting the provision of Section 16(3) of Hindu Marriage Act.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 — Section 16 — Benefit given under the amended Section 16 is available only in cases where there is a marriage but such marriage is void or voidable in view of the provisions of the Act.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 — Section 16(3) — Word “property” — The legislature has advisedly used the word “property” and has not qualified it with either self-acquired property or ancestral property — It has been kept broad and general.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 — Section 16(3) — Illegitimate children will have a right to whatever becomes the property of their parents whether self acquired or ancestral — The legislature has advisedly used the word “property” and has not qualified it with either self-acquired property or ancestral property — It has been kept broad and general — Interpretation of Section 16(3) given in Jinia Keotin [(2003) 1 SCC 730], Neelamma  [(2006) 9 SCC 612] and Bharatha Matha [AIR 2010 SC 2685] that a child born in a void or voidable marriage was not entitled to claim inheritance in ancestral coparcenary property but was entitled to claim only share in self-acquired properties cannot be accepted and needs to be reconsidered — Matter referred to larger Bench.

 
Monday, October 04, 2010
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Sections 13 and 13B — Divorce by consent — 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 under section 13 of the Act, unless of course the consenting parties proceed under section 13B of the Act.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13 — Divorce — In the present case,  the respondent filed an affidavit before the court declaring his willingness to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000.00 (rupees ten lakhs only) as life term maintenance of the appellant and for the expenses of marriage of their daughter Kumari Ayushi Mohanty (Richi), in consideration of the dissolution of his marriage with the appellant by a decree of divorce and compounding of a criminal case instituted against him by the appellant — The High Court in its order simply paraphrased the statements made in the affidavit filed by the respondent and made it the order of the court — Held, order of the High Court granting a decree of divorce for dissolution of the respondent’s marriage with the appellant is completely unsustainable, and is, therefore, set aside — A Hindu marriage can be dissolved only on any of the grounds plainly and clearly enumerated under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act — The law does not permit the purchase of a decree of divorce for consideration, with or without the consent of the other side.

 
Friday, August 27, 2010
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13-B — Divorce by mutual consent — Temperamental incompatibility — Held, if because of temperamental incompatibility husband and wife cannot live with each other then it is proper that they should jointly get a decree of divorce by mutual consent.

 
Wednesday, August 04, 2010
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 24 — Maintenance pendent lite and expenses of proceedings — Held, Section 24 provides that in any proceeding under the Act, the spouse who has no independent income sufficient for her or his support may apply to the court to direct the respondent to pay the monthly maintenance as the court may think reasonable, regard being had to the petitioner’s own income and the income of the respondent.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 24 — Interim maintenance — Held, although the discretion conferred on the court is wide, the Section provides guideline inasmuch as while fixing the interim maintenance the court has to give due regard to the income of the respondent and the petitioner’s own income — In other words, in the matter of making an order for interim maintenance, the discretion of the court must be guided by the criterion provided in the Section, namely, the means of the parties and also after taking into account incidental and other relevant factors like social status; the background from which both the parties come from and the economical dependence of the petitioner.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 24 — Interim maintenance — Wide discretion, held, has been conferred on the court in the matter of an order for interim maintenance.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 24 — Interim maintenance — Since an order for interim maintenance by its very nature is temporary, a detailed and elaborate exercise by the court may not be necessary, but, at the same time, the court has got to take all the relevant factors into account and arrive at a proper amount having regard to the factors which are mentioned in the statute.

 
Thursday, June 03, 2010
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 16 — Held, Section 16 of the Act intends to bring about social reforms, conferment of social status of legitimacy on a group of children, otherwise treated as illegitimate, as its prime object.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 16 — Held, a child born of void or voidable marriage is not entitled to claim inheritance in ancestral coparcenery property but is entitled only to claim share in self acquired properties, if any.

 
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 and Section 13-B — Application for custody of children — In the joint petition of divorce, parties voluntarily agreed that the custody of the child shall remain with the mother and father shall have only visiting rights, in the manner indicated in the mutual divorce decree — Held, Trial Court has power under section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act to modify the terms and conditions of the custody and visitation rights of a parent — The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant, that in view of the provisions of Section 26 of the Act, the order of custody of the child and the visitation rights of the appellant cannot be changed as they are not reflected in the decree of mutual divorce, is far too hyper technical an objection to be considered seriously in a custody proceeding — A child is not a chattel nor is he/she an article of personal property to be shared in equal halves.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Custody of children — Held, custody orders are always considered interlocutory orders and by the nature of such proceedings custody orders cannot be made rigid and final — They are capable of being altered and moulded keeping in mind the needs of the child.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Custody of children — All orders relating to custody of minors are temporary orders — With the passage of time, the Court is entitled to modify the order in the interest of the minor child — Even if orders are based on consent, those orders can also be varied if the welfare of the child so demands — Rosy Jacob vs. Jacob A Chakramakkal - [(1973) 1 SCC 840] and Dhanwanti Joshi vs. Madhav Unde - [(1998) 1 SCC 112] relied.

 
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(ia) — Cruelty — It would be sufficient to show that the conduct of one of the spouses is so abnormal and below the accepted norm that the other spouse could not reasonably be expected to put up with it — The conduct is no longer required to be so atrociously abominable which would cause a reasonable apprehension that it would be harmful or injurious to continue the cohabitation with the other spouse — Therefore to establish cruelty it is not necessary that physical violence should be used — However continued ill-treatment cessation of marital intercourse, studied neglect, indifference of one spouse to the other may lead to an inference of cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(ia) and Section 10 — Divorce — Cruelty — Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court, in the present case, concluded that the husband had failed to establish cruelty on the part of the wife which will be sufficient to grant a decree of divorce — Appellate Court, however, granted the alternative relief to the husband by passing a decree for judicial separation under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act — This decree was passed with the hope that the parties would ponder upon the situation and may be able to re-unite for the welfare of the child — If, on the other hand, the parties do not reconcile within the statutory period of one year it will be open to either of them to seek a decree of divorce — Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment the wife went in appeal before the Division Bench challenging the grant of decree of judicial separation to the husband by the Appellate Court — Division Bench on a re-evaluation of the evidence concluded that all efforts of reconciliation between parties have failed and the marriage has irretrievably broken down — Division Bench granted decree of divorce to the husband — Held, the Division Bench of the High Court has erred in granting a decree of divorce to the husband — The wife had come in appeal before the Division Bench complaining that the Appellate Court had wrongly granted the decree of judicial separation even after concurring with the findings of the Trial Court that the husband had failed to establish cruelty by the wife — Therefore even if the appeal had been dismissed, the findings recorded by the Trial Court in her favour would have remained intact — The effect of the order passed by the Division Bench is as if an appeal of the husband against the decree of judicial separation has been allowed — Judgment and the Order passed by the Division Bench set aside — Order passed by the learned Single Judge restored — Appeal allowed.

 
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B — Divorce by mutual consent — Held, it is only on the continued mutual consent of the parties that decree for divorce under Section 13B of the said Act can be passed by the Court — If petition for divorce is not formally withdrawn and is kept pending then on the date when the Court grants the decree, the Court has a statutory obligation to hear the parties to ascertain their consent — From the absence of one of the parties for two to three days, the Court cannot presume his/her consent as has been done by the learned Family Court Judge in the instant case.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B — Divorce by mutual consent — Held, it is only the mutual consent of the parties which gives the Court the jurisdiction to pass a decree for divorce under Section 13B — So in cases under Section 13B, mutual consent of the parties is a jurisdictional fact — The Court while passing its decree under Section 13B would be slow and circumspect before it can infer the existence of such jurisdictional fact — The Court has to be satisfied about the existence of mutual consent between the parties on some tangible materials which demonstrably disclose such consent.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B (2) — Divorce by mutual consent — Under Section 13B (2), the requirement is the ‘motion of both the parties’ and interpreting the same, it is made clear that there should be mutual consent when they move the Court with a request to pass a decree of divorce and there should be consent also at the time when the Court is called upon to make an enquiry, if the petition is not withdrawn and then pass the final decree — Further held, if the Court makes an enquiry and passes a divorce decree even at the instance of one of the parties and against the consent of the other, such a decree cannot be regarded as a decree by mutual consent.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B — Divorce by mutual consent — There is no scope of doubting the views taken in the case of Smt. Shreshta Devi vs. Om Parkash (1991) 2 SCC 25.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B — Divorce by mutual consent — The decisions of the Bombay High Court [Jayashree Ramesh Londhe v. Ramesh Bhikaji Londhe – AIR 1982 Bom 302: 86 Bom LR 184], Delhi High Court [Chander Kanta v. Hans Kumar – AIR 1989 Del 73] and Madhya Pradesh High Court [Meena Dutta v. Anirudh Dutta – (1984) 2 DMC 388 (MP)], held, cannot be said to have laid down the law correctly and therefore, are overruled.        

 
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1) — Divorce — When a marriage is dead emotionally and practically and there is no chance of its being retrieved, the continuance of such a marriage would amount to cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1) — Divorce — Marriage between the parties, in the present case, is dead for all practical purposes and there is no chance of it being retrieved, as out of 16 years of marriage the appellant and the respondent had been living separately for 14 years, most of which has been spent in acrimonious allegations against each other in the litigation embarked upon by both the parties — Held, continuance of such marriage would itself amount to cruelty, and, accordingly in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the marriage of the appellant and the respondent shall stand dissolved — Constitution of India, 1950, Article 142.

 
Monday, January 12, 2009
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Whether a marriage entered into by a Hindu with a Christian is valid under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ? — Held, no.  

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 5 — Expression ‘may’ — The usage of the expression ‘may' in the opening line of the Section, held, does not make the provision of Section 5 optional — On the other hand, it in positive terms, indicates that a marriage can be solemnized between two Hindus if the conditions indicated were fulfilled — In other words, in the event the conditions remain unfulfilled, a marriage between two Hindus could not be solemnized.   

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 5 — Expression ‘may’ — The expression `may' used in the opening words of Section 5 is not directory, as has been sought to be argued, but mandatory and non-fulfilment thereof would not permit a marriage under the Act between two Hindus.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 7 read with Section 5 — Held, Section 7 of the 1955 Act is to be read along with Section 5 in that a Hindu marriage, as understood under Section 5, could be solemnized according to the ceremonies indicated therein.

 
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — If a husband submits himself for an operation of sterilization without medical reasons and without the consent or knowledge of his wife and similarly if the wife undergoes vasectomy or abortion without medical reason or without the consent or knowledge of her husband, such an act of the spouse may lead to mental cruelty. 

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Unilateral decision of refusal to have intercourse for considerable period without there being any physical incapacity or valid reason may amount to mental cruelty. 

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Unilateral decision of either husband or wife after marriage not to have child from the marriage may amount to cruelty. 

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Where there has been a long period of continuous separation, it may fairly be concluded that the matrimonial bond is beyond repair — The marriage becomes a fiction though supported by a legal tie — By refusing to sever that tie, the law in such cases, does not serve the sanctity of marriage; on the contrary, it shows scant regard for the feelings and emotions of the parties — In such like situations, it may lead to mental cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — The High Court’s finding that the husband and wife might be sleeping in separate rooms did not lead to a conclusion that they did not cohabit and to justify this by saying that the respondent was highly educated and holding a high post, held, was entirely unsustainable — Once the respondent accepted to become the wife of the appellant, she had to respect the marital bond and discharge obligations of marital life.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Indifference and neglect of the spouse during his illness — The finding of the High Court that if the ailment of the husband was not very serious and he was not even confined to bed for his illness and even assuming the wife under such circumstances did not meet the husband, such behaviour can hardly amount to cruelty, held, cannot be sustained — During illness, particularly in a nuclear family, the husband normally looks after and supports his wife and similarly, he would expect the same from her — The respondent’s total indifference and neglect of the appellant during his illness would certainly lead to great annoyance leading to mental cruelty. 

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — There cannot be any comprehensive definition of the concept of ‘mental cruelty’ within which all kinds of cases of mental cruelty can be covered — No court in our considered view should even attempt to give a comprehensive definition of mental cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Cruelty — What is cruelty in one case may not amount to cruelty in other case — The concept of cruelty differs from person to person depending upon his upbringing, level of sensitivity, educational, family and cultural background, financial position, social status, customs, traditions, religious beliefs, human values and their value system.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — The concept of mental cruelty cannot remain static; it is bound to change with the passage of time, impact of modern culture through print and electronic media and value system etc. etc. — What may be mental cruelty now may not remain a mental cruelty after a passage of time or vice versa — There can never be any strait-jacket formula or fixed parameters for determining mental cruelty in matrimonial matters — The prudent and appropriate way to adjudicate the case would be to evaluate it on its peculiar facts and circumstances while taking aforementioned factors in consideration.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — On consideration of complete matrimonial life of the parties, acute mental pain, agony and suffering as would not make possible for the parties to live with each other could come within the broad parameters of mental cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Mere coldness or lack of affection cannot amount to cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Frequent rudeness of language, petulance of manner, indifference and neglect, held, amounts to mental cruelty. 

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Mental cruelty is a state of mind — The feeling of deep anguish, disappointment, frustration in one spouse caused by the conduct of other for a long time may lead to mental cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — A sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment calculated to torture, discommode or render miserable life of the spouse, held, amounts to mental cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Sustained reprehensible conduct, studied neglect, indifference or total departure from the normal standard of conjugal kindness causing injury to mental health or deriving sadistic pleasure can also amount to mental cruelty. 

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Sustained unjustifiable conduct and behaviour of one spouse actually affecting physical and mental health of the other spouse, held, amounts to mental cruelty — The treatment complained of and the resultant danger or apprehension must be very grave, substantial and weighty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — The conduct of the spouse must be much more than jealousy, selfishness, possessiveness, which causes unhappiness and dissatisfaction and emotional upset so as to attract Secton 13(1)(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — Mere trivial irritations, quarrels, normal wear and tear of the married life which happens in day to day life would not be adequate for grant of divorce on the ground of mental cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i)(a) — Mental cruelty — The married life should be reviewed as a whole and a few isolated instances over a period of years will not amount to cruelty — The ill-conduct must be persistent for a fairly lengthy period, where the relationship has deteriorated to an extent that because of the acts and behaviour of a spouse, the wronged party finds it extremely difficult to live with the other party any longer, may amount to mental cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13 — Divorce — Irreparable break down of marriage — Once the parties have separated and the separation has continued for a sufficient length of time and one of them has presented a petition for divorce, it can well be presumed that the marriage has broken down — The court, no doubt, should seriously make an endeavour to reconcile the parties; yet, if it is found that the breakdown is irreparable, then divorce should not be withheld — The consequences of preservation in law of the unworkable marriage which has long ceased to be effective are bound to be a source of greater misery for the parties.

 
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Sections 13, 23(2) — Divorce petition — Reconciliation between the parties — Court is bound, to make all attempts and endeavours of reconciliation — Sub-section (2) of Section 23 is a salutary provision exhibiting the intention of Parliament requiring the Court ‘in the first instance’ to make every endeavour to bring about a reconciliation between the parties — If in the light of the above intention and paramount consideration of the Legislature in enacting such provision, an order is passed by a Matrimonial Court asking a party to the proceeding (husband or wife) to remain personally present, it cannot successfully be contended that the Court has no such power and in case a party to a proceeding does not remain present, at the most, the Court can proceed to decide the case ex parte against him/her — Court can even issue non-bailable warrants — Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 3, Rule 1 and Order 9, Rule 12.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 23(2) — Matrimonial matters must be considered by courts with human angle and sensitivity — Delicate issues affecting conjugal relations have to be handled carefully and legal provisions should be construed and interpreted without being oblivious or unmindful of human weaknesses — Probably, this aspect has been kept in view by the Legislature in enacting sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the Act by requiring a court to make all efforts to bring about reconciliation between the parties. 

 
Monday, August 07, 2006
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Sections 5, 11 and 16 — Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Sections 6 and 8 — Second marriage took place during the subsistence of the first marriage — Held, second marriage is void — However, children born out of the void marriage are entitled to inherit the property of deceased father along with first wife.

 
Friday, June 09, 2006
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1) (ia) — Cruelty — The word ‘Cruelty’ has to be understood in the ordinary sense of the term in matrimonial affairs — If the intention to harm, harass or hurt could be inferred by the nature of the conduct or brutal act complained of, cruelty could be easily established — But the absence of intention should not make any difference in the case — There may be instances of cruelty by unintentional but inexcusable conduct of any party — The cruel treatment may also result from the cultural conflict between the parties. 

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1) (ia) — Mental Cruelty — Held, mental cruelty can be caused by a party when the other spouse levels an allegation that the petitioner is a mental patient, or that he requires expert psychological treatment to restore his mental health, that he is suffering from paranoid disorder and mental hallucinations, and to crown it all, to allege that he and all the members of his family are a bunch of lunatics — The allegation that members of the petitioner’s family are lunatics and that a streak of insanity runs though his entire family is also an act of mental cruelty.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1) (ia) — Cruelty — Held, the cruelty alleged may largely depend upon the type of life the parties are accustomed to or their economic and social conditions and their culture and human values to which they attach importance — Each case, held, has to be decided on its own merits.

 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage — Recommendation to Union of India to seriously consider bringing an amendment in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, to incorporate irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for the grant of divorce.

 
Act Topic
Rule Citation
Keyword
 
Free Text Search
 
Follow us on :
(Best view with 1024x768 Resolution)
© All rights including Copyrights and rights of translations etc, reserved and vested exclusively with Deepak Publications. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronics, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, or stored in any retrival system of any nature without the written permission of the copyright owner.

By using this site, you (and any entity on whose behalf your are acting) are consenting to be bound by Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy & Disclaimer Clause.