Thanks for the post. Why on earth should we allow the spouse take advantages of their own wrongful immoral acts?

Exactly , we should not ...

@Ambika

Thanks for posting,

Here is the Judgment in PDF file format:(

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 

                                Judgment reserved on:   24.9.2010  

                                  Judgment delivered on:  13.01.2011  

                        FAO No. 46/1995 

 Smt. Vimal Kanta                                ……Appellant  

                    Vs. 

Shri J.M.  Kohli      ……Respondent. 

This  Court  in  the  case  of  Smt.  Rohini  Kumari  v.  Narendra

Singh,:  [1972]2SCR657  ,  while  considering  the  case  of  judicial

separation on the ground of desertion under Section 10(1)(a) of

the Act read with the Explanation, held:

"...The  two  elements  present  on  the  side  of  the  deserted

spouse should be absence of consent and absence of conduct

reasonably  causing  the  deserting  spouse  to  form  his  or  her

intention  to  bring  cohabitation  to  an  end.  The  requirement

that the deserting spouse must intend to bring cohabitation to

an end must be understood to be subject to the qualification

that if without just cause or excuse a man persists in doing

things which he knows his wife probably will not tolerate and

which no ordinary woman would tolerate and then she leaves,

he  has  deserted  her  whatever  his  desire  or  intention  may

have   been.   The   doctrine   of   "constructive   desertion"  is

discussed at page 229. It is stated that desertion is not to be

tested by merely ascertaining which party left the matrimonial

home first. If one spouse is forced by the conduct of the other

to leave home it may be that the spouse responsible for the

driving  out  is  guilty  of  desertion.  There  is  no  substantial

difference between the case of a man who intends to cease

cohabitation and leaves the wife and the case of a man who

with  the  same  intention  compels  his  wife  by  his  conduct  to

leave him.

In Lachman Utamchand Kirpalani v. Meena alias Mota, this Court

had occasion to consider the true meaning the ambit of Section

10(1)(a)  of  the  Act  read  with  the  Explanation.  Reference  was

made  in  the  majority  judgment  to  the  earlier  decision  in  Bipin

Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah v. Prabhawati, in which all the English

decisions  as  also  the  statement  contained  in  authoritative  text

books  were  considered.  After  referring  to  the  two  essential

conditions,  namely,  the  factum  of  physical  separation  and  the

animus  deserendi  which  meant  the  intention  to  bring  the

cohabitation permanently to an end as also the two elements so

far as the deserted spouse was concerned i.e.(1) the absence of

consent  and  (2)  absence  of  conduct giving  reasonable  cause  to

the  spouse leaving  the matrimonial home to  form  the intention

aforesaid, it was observed while examining how desertion might

come to an end:

"In the first place, there must be conduct on the part of

the  deserted  spouse  which  affords  just  and  reasonable

cause for the deserting spouse not to seek reconciliation

and which absolves her from her continuing obligation to

return  to  the  matrimonial  home.  In  this  one  has  to  be

regard to the conduct of the deserted spouse. But there is

one other matter which is also of equal importance, that

is,  that the conduct  of the  deserted  spouse  should  have

had such an impact on the mind of the deserting spouse

that in fact it causes her to continue to live apart and thus

continue the desertion. But where however, on the facts it

is clear that the conduct of the deserted spouse has had

no such effect on the mind of the deserting spouse there

is  no  rule  of  law  that  desertion  terminates  by  reason  of

the conduct of the deserted spouse."  

This is not the judgement related to my article mr. Kushan. You have posted some other judgement unrelated to my posting. So please care to post the right judgement. 

Ofocurse any judgement posted here should receive a thank you, and hence a thumb up for you...

Can someone post the judgement related to the title of the news article? 

Kushan ji the news I have posted is about SC judgement and not related to Delhi high court Judgement. So if you can kindly post the relevant judgement, would appreciate.Thanks 

Himachal HC and SC judgement of above ..............

https://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1076184/

https://www.498a.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=5679

I do not want to divorce my wife keeping my little son's future in mind, but also do not want to live with my wife due to her cruelty. I have already filed a divorce petition.

Just wanted to know if the maintenance petitiion can only processed legally thru court without divorce application? I cannot take risk by mutual understanding for maintenance with her. Can this be legally considered to stay seperately and give maintenance ? Appreciate quick solution !! thanks.