Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Collector’s Appointment of Ex-Serviceman as Lambardar: Preference for Service to the State Valid Tax to Be Computed at 100% Under DTVSV Act, Rejects Inclusion of Belated Grounds in Disputed Tax: Bombay High Court Petitioner’s Father Did Not Fall Within Definition of Enemy – Kerala High Court Quashes Land Classification Under Enemy Property Act Calcutta High Court Upholds Cancellation of LPG Distributor LOI for Violating Guidelines Recording 'Reasons to Believe' is a Mandatory Safeguard, Not a Mere Formality Under PMLA: P&H High Court Illegality Is Incurable, Unauthorized Constructions Cannot Be Regularized: Bombay High Court Kerala High Court Quashes Tribunal’s Order Granting Retrospective UGC Benefits to Librarians Without Required Qualifications Order XLI Rule 27 CPC | No Evidence Can Be Admitted Beyond Pleadings, And Additional Evidence Cannot Be Allowed Merely To Fill Lacunae: Jharkhand High Court Quashing | Mere Heated Exchanges Over Loan Repayment Do Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide: Supreme Court Prisoner Transfers Must Prioritize Security and Prevent Gang Violence: Supreme Court Restores Intra-State Transfer Order Jurisdiction Under Section 100 CPC Is Conditional Upon Framing Substantial Questions of Law: Supreme Court Panchayat Election | Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Bar on Judicial Review During Election Process Encroachment Allegation Requires Concrete Evidence, Not Mere Surmises: Bombay High Court Dismisses Plea for Disqualification of Sarpanch Order Denying Permission for Peaceful Protest Rally Set Aside: Calcutta High Court Prolonged Custody Alone Cannot Justify Bail In Cases Involving Heinous Crimes: Delhi High Court Body Shaming and Sexually Colored Remarks Are Unacceptable In A Civilized Society: Kerala High Court No Mandatory Injunction Where Failure to Prove Ownership and Possession: Punjab and Haryana High Court Supreme Court Dismisses Article 32 Petition Seeking Declaration of Bombay High Court Judgment as Illegal Specific Relief Act | Power to Extend Time Under Section 28 Is Discretionary and Must Be Exercised Prudently: Supreme Court

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

Similar News