Pleading of wife that husband is womanizer and corrupt without proving it whether amounts to cruelty?
In Kamini Gupta (supra), the Supreme Court has observed that
reckless allegations amount to mental cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the
HMA. In the present case, the appellant has unhesitantly, consciously and
knowingly made serious allegations against the respondent, which adversely
reflect on his character and morality. He is alleged to be a corrupt officer
and a womanizer. It is alleged that he had an illicit relationship with one SJ.
None of these allegations had been established by the appellant by leading
any cogent evidence. It is one thing for a spouse to speak harshly to the
other in the course of an argument and in the heat of moment. Harsh words
and utterances so spoken are bound to cause pain and anguish and also result
in anger and a grouse being experienced by the other spouse. However,
such wear and tear in a matrimonial relationship is normally healed, and the
parties move on in life. But, it assumes a difference when serious allegations
are made by one spouse against the other – not in the heat of the moment,
but in a premeditated and planned manner in legal proceedings.
In the present case, the appellant has made these allegations in her
defence/written statement. She had better known to the consequence of
making these allegations and not establishing the same when she made
them. Her failure to lead any evidence on these allegations clearly shows
that they were made recklessly. The making of these allegations by the
appellant in her written statement undoubtedly would have caused immense
pain and suffering to the respondent/husband, as the allegations impinge on
his character and morality. To be called a womanizer and corrupt by his own
spouse, would have caused such pain and suffering to the respondent as
would lead him to entertain the apprehension that it would not be conducive
to his physical and mental well being to live with the appellant/wife.
Consequently, I am of the view that the learned ADJ rightly
concluded that the appellant treated the respondent with cruelty entitling him
to seek dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(ia).
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 07.01.2016
MAT. APP. 54/2009
AS ..... Appellant
versus
SNS ..... Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
reckless allegations amount to mental cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the
HMA. In the present case, the appellant has unhesitantly, consciously and
knowingly made serious allegations against the respondent, which adversely
reflect on his character and morality. He is alleged to be a corrupt officer
and a womanizer. It is alleged that he had an illicit relationship with one SJ.
None of these allegations had been established by the appellant by leading
any cogent evidence. It is one thing for a spouse to speak harshly to the
other in the course of an argument and in the heat of moment. Harsh words
and utterances so spoken are bound to cause pain and anguish and also result
in anger and a grouse being experienced by the other spouse. However,
such wear and tear in a matrimonial relationship is normally healed, and the
parties move on in life. But, it assumes a difference when serious allegations
are made by one spouse against the other – not in the heat of the moment,
but in a premeditated and planned manner in legal proceedings.
In the present case, the appellant has made these allegations in her
defence/written statement. She had better known to the consequence of
making these allegations and not establishing the same when she made
them. Her failure to lead any evidence on these allegations clearly shows
that they were made recklessly. The making of these allegations by the
appellant in her written statement undoubtedly would have caused immense
pain and suffering to the respondent/husband, as the allegations impinge on
his character and morality. To be called a womanizer and corrupt by his own
spouse, would have caused such pain and suffering to the respondent as
would lead him to entertain the apprehension that it would not be conducive
to his physical and mental well being to live with the appellant/wife.
Consequently, I am of the view that the learned ADJ rightly
concluded that the appellant treated the respondent with cruelty entitling him
to seek dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(ia).
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 07.01.2016
MAT. APP. 54/2009
AS ..... Appellant
versus
SNS ..... Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
https://www.lawweb.in/2016/01/pleading-of-wife-that-husband-is.html