Mere Reproduction Of Evidence Can Never Be Equated With Appreciation: Karnataka High Court Quashes Penalty Against Govt Employee Accused Cannot Repeatedly Send Cheque To FSL Till Favourable Report Is Obtained: Kerala High Court In NI Act Case Succession Certificate Cannot Be Issued For Gold Jewels Pledged With Bank, Applies Only To Debts And Securities: Madras High Court Order 11 Rule 14 CPC | Court Cannot Direct Production Of Documents Without Ascertaining They Are In Party's Possession: Calcutta High Court Undertrial Prisoners Don't Suffer 'Civil Death', Retain Fundamental Right To Alienate Property From Jail: Rajasthan High Court Direction For Reasonable Annual Enhancement Of Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Merely Preserves Its Real Value Against Inflation: Delhi High Court Testimony Of Sole Interested Witness Must Be Of 'Sterling Quality' To Base Conviction: Patna High Court Acquits Murder Convict Failure To Communicate Written Grounds Of Arrest Renders Arrest Constitutionally Infirm, Accused Entitled To Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 482 CrPC Petition Not Maintainable Against Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act, Appeal Lies Under Section 14A: Tripura High Court Disputed Questions Of Fact Regarding Title And Forged Documents Cannot Be Decided Under Article 226: Telangana High Court Matter To Be Enquired By Bar Council: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Lawyer's PILs With Costs For Suppressing Attorney-Client Relationship BDA Cannot Arbitrarily Reverse Resolutions Passed To Comply With Judicial Directives: Karnataka High Court Section 52A NDPS Act: Mere Non-Compliance Does Not Automatically Vitiate Trial Unless Evidence Is Doubtful: Punjab & Haryana High Court Seniority Must Be Determined From Date Of Substantive Appointment, Not Ad-Hoc Service: Allahabad High Court Uncorroborated Testimony Of Drug Inspector Cannot Form Sole Basis For Conviction Under Drugs Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suppression Of Adverse Facts Strikes At Root Of Equitable Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Denies Injunction In HUF Property Dispute

Delhi High Court Upholds Divorce Decree Citing ‘Mental Cruelty and Contradictions in Appellant’s Statements’”

06 September 2024 5:36 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment pronounced today, the Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal filed by a woman, identified as Preeti, against a divorce decree granted in favor of her husband, Vikas. The court cited “mental cruelty” and contradictions in the appellant’s statements as the primary reasons for upholding the divorce.

The Hon'ble Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna presided over the case. The court observed, “The appellant has not produced any evidence to prove that her father had given Rs 10 lacs to the father of the respondent. Apart from mere assertions, there is no mention of such a payment being made to the respondent’s family.”

The court also noted that the appellant had filed a complaint against her husband and his family members, but failed to substantiate her claims with evidence. “Mere filing of FIR is not sufficient to prove the allegations of cruelty and dowry harassment without being proved by cogent evidence,” the judgment read.

The court further stated, “It appears that such complaints were merely a counter-blast to the said petition for divorce and is being used as a weapon against the respondent and his family.”

The judgment also emphasized the importance of mental cruelty as a ground for divorce, stating that “mental cruelty must be of such a nature that the parties cannot reasonably be expected to live together.”

The court concurred with the Principal Judge, Family Court, and dismissed the appeal, thereby upholding the divorce decree granted in favor of the respondent under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Date of Decision: September 5, 2023

PREETI vs VIKAS

Latest Legal News