Man granted divorce; wife's cruelty cited
8 May 2012 12:26 AM GMT
A Delhi-based man finally got the freedom he was waiting for after Justice Veena Birbal granted him divorce. The Delhi high court judge was convinced, based on the witnesses acounts, that Sunil (name changed) was treated cruelly by his wife. Kalpana (name changed), his wife, despite being issued summons, did not attend the proceedings.
Earlier, the lower court had held that Sunil had failed to prove that he was treated cruelly by his wife and he was not granted divorce.
Sunil and Kalpana had got married in 2004 in Noida. It was second marriage for both of them. Sunil was a widower while Kalpana was a divorcee. Sunil had two children from the first marriage. After the birth of Sunil’s second child, his wife had died in 2003. At the time of marriage, Sunil had disclosed to Kalpana about having children from earlier marriage and he had also told her that he was marrying her so that his children could get mother’s love and affection.
Kalpana’s earlier marriage was performed in 1997, however, they had temperament differences, due to which they could not live together and their marriage was dissolved by a family court in Ranchi. Kalpana, too, had a son from the previous marriage, but was left in the custody of her divorced husband.
Sunil had alleged that after marriage, Kalpana started ill-treating the children in his presence and used to beat them. As a result of which, Sunil had brought his mother from his native place so children could be spared the torture. He had alleged that whenever his mother tried to refrain Kalpana from beating the children, Kalpana used to retaliate and had abused his mother. Kalpana also used to quarrel with Sunil and abused him. She did not cook food for the family. Sunil alleged that despite the advice given by him and his mother, Kalpana refused to change her behaviour. Sunil also requested Kalpana’s father to impress upon her to behave properly in the matrimonial home but due to adamant attitude of Kalpana, her father did not interfere.
Sunil alleged that Kalpana had created a horryfying scene in the presence of all family members during the last rites of his aunt in Muzaffarpur in 2007 and this caused caused great humiliation and mental torture to him. Sunil also alleged in his petition that Kalpana was constantly threatening him to transfer the house in her name or to pay her by selling the house otherwise she would approach the Crime against Women Cell. Sunil alleged that Kalpana had treated him and his family with utmost cruelty since their marriage and it was not possible to live with her and that there was a danger to the life of his children.
'Appellant (Sunil) has deposed about the cruel treatment of respondent (Kalpana) during the period when they had lived as husband and wife. All these acts clearly establish that the respondent has treated the appellant with cruelty. There is nothing on record to show that the appellant has condoned the acts of cruelty of respondent in any manner and the appellant was thus entitled to the grant of divorce. I, accordingly, set aside the impugned judgment and decree, allow this appeal and further allow the petition of the appellant and dissolve the marriage between the parties by an ex parte decree of divorce,' said Justice Veena Birbal.
Earlier, the lower court had held that Sunil had failed to prove that he was treated cruelly by his wife and he was not granted divorce.
Sunil and Kalpana had got married in 2004 in Noida. It was second marriage for both of them. Sunil was a widower while Kalpana was a divorcee. Sunil had two children from the first marriage. After the birth of Sunil’s second child, his wife had died in 2003. At the time of marriage, Sunil had disclosed to Kalpana about having children from earlier marriage and he had also told her that he was marrying her so that his children could get mother’s love and affection.
Kalpana’s earlier marriage was performed in 1997, however, they had temperament differences, due to which they could not live together and their marriage was dissolved by a family court in Ranchi. Kalpana, too, had a son from the previous marriage, but was left in the custody of her divorced husband.
Sunil had alleged that after marriage, Kalpana started ill-treating the children in his presence and used to beat them. As a result of which, Sunil had brought his mother from his native place so children could be spared the torture. He had alleged that whenever his mother tried to refrain Kalpana from beating the children, Kalpana used to retaliate and had abused his mother. Kalpana also used to quarrel with Sunil and abused him. She did not cook food for the family. Sunil alleged that despite the advice given by him and his mother, Kalpana refused to change her behaviour. Sunil also requested Kalpana’s father to impress upon her to behave properly in the matrimonial home but due to adamant attitude of Kalpana, her father did not interfere.
Sunil alleged that Kalpana had created a horryfying scene in the presence of all family members during the last rites of his aunt in Muzaffarpur in 2007 and this caused caused great humiliation and mental torture to him. Sunil also alleged in his petition that Kalpana was constantly threatening him to transfer the house in her name or to pay her by selling the house otherwise she would approach the Crime against Women Cell. Sunil alleged that Kalpana had treated him and his family with utmost cruelty since their marriage and it was not possible to live with her and that there was a danger to the life of his children.
'Appellant (Sunil) has deposed about the cruel treatment of respondent (Kalpana) during the period when they had lived as husband and wife. All these acts clearly establish that the respondent has treated the appellant with cruelty. There is nothing on record to show that the appellant has condoned the acts of cruelty of respondent in any manner and the appellant was thus entitled to the grant of divorce. I, accordingly, set aside the impugned judgment and decree, allow this appeal and further allow the petition of the appellant and dissolve the marriage between the parties by an ex parte decree of divorce,' said Justice Veena Birbal.
Next Story
