Gratuity Is A Statutory Right, Cannot Be Denied On Vague Allegations Of Abandonment: Calcutta High Court Directs Employer To Pay Pending Gratuity With Interest Prosecutrix Is a Victim of Crime, Not an Accomplice — Sole Testimony Sufficient for Conviction If It Inspires Confidence: Bombay High Court Rape Is An Offence Against Society And Not A Matter To Be Left For Compromise: Allahabad High Court Refuses To Quash Proceedings Under Section 376 IPC And U.P. Conversion Prevention Act Despite Settlement Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Compartmentalized Horizontal Reservation in Sports Quota for MBBS Admissions Total Non-Compliance of Section 42 Vitiates the Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Acquittal in 25-Year-Old NDPS Case Involving 30 Bags of Poppy Husk An Advocate’s Office Situated in a Commercial Building Qualifies as Non-Residential Use Entitling Eviction under Section 12(1)(f) of M.P. Accommodation Control Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Due to Criminal History—Conspiracy Allegations Alone Insufficient Without Direct Role in SC/ST Offence: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Vested Right to Retain Government Accommodation After Losing Public Office — Penal Rent Justified for Unauthorized Occupation: Patna High Court These Litigations Appear to Be Luxury Litigations: Allahabad High Court Imposes Cost on Over 6400 Petitioners Seeking Revival of TET-Based Selection Process Rule 6(2) Is Not a Cut-Off Provision—Supreme Court Declares Candidates Eligible If D.El.Ed. Was Completed Before Selection Implementation of Slum Rehabilitation Scheme Cannot Be Halted on the Basis of Belated and Baseless Custody Without Communication of Grounds Is No Custody in Law —Violation of Articles 21 and 22 Nullifies Arrest and Remand: Punjab & Haryana High Court Declares Arrest of Music Producer as Illegal Scribe Is Not a Substitute for Attesting Witness—Will Must Satisfy Section 63 of Succession Act and Section 68 of Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Rejects 45-Year-Old Testamentary Claim Removal From Service With Superannuation Benefits Entitles Employee to Pension: Supreme Court Acknowledgment of Liability Extends Limitation — Pendency of Appeal No Ground to Resist Recovery: Supreme Court Sympathy Cannot Override Binding Conditions of Tender: Supreme Court Sets  Aside High Court’s Direction to Alter Applicant’s Group Classification for BPCL Dealership Land Acquisition | Factory Without CLU Can't Claim Land Release Despite Long Possession; However, Compensation Under 2013 Act Granted : Supreme Court Person’s Identity Is Not Lost If a Machine Fails to Recognize Them: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes LIC’s Rejection Over Biometric Mismatch Mother Cannot Mask Paternity to Satisfy Ego: Bombay High Court Rejects Petition to List Woman as ‘Single Parent’ in Child’s Birth Certificate Transferee Pendente Lite Is Bound by the Decree—Cannot Obstruct Execution Proceedings: Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Revisional Court for Overreach Higher Placement in Seniority List Cannot Be Ignored: Supreme Court Upholds Direction to Consider Contractual Worker for Appointment on Par with Others Regularised CBI Investigation is Not to Be Ordered Routinely on Vague Allegations: Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court’s Order Directing CBI Probe in Extortion Case When Aggressors Trespass Armed into a Dwelling and Cause Fatal Injuries, Exception to Murder Does Not Arise: Supreme Court Affirms Conviction under Section 302 IPC Delayed Payment for 50 Years Warrants Reasonable Interest, But Excessive Rates Cannot Be Granted": Supreme Court

High Court Rules: Irretrievable Breakdown Must Be Proven Under Hindu Marriage Act, Dissolves Marriage

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court delivered a significant ruling, emphasizing that the concept of irretrievable breakdown of marriage must be proven under the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage. The court’s decision came in response to a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, challenging the fair and decreetal order dated 13.10.2017, which granted a divorce in H.M.O.P.No.780 of 2014.

The judgment, delivered on 22.12.2023, highlighted the importance of establishing the grounds for divorce, specifically cruelty and desertion, as per the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act. The court noted that the appellant, who was the wife in this case, had counterclaimed for restitution of conjugal rights, contesting her husband’s plea for divorce.

One of the key legal points in the court’s observation was the need for proper substantiation of claims. The judgment stated, “The husband, having come to the Court seeking the relief of dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty, has to plead the alleged act of cruelty of the wife committed upon him and thereafter prove the same in the manner as established by law.”

The court further highlighted that in this particular case, the allegations of cruelty made by the husband were not proven in the manner known to law. Additionally, the court found that the husband’s own actions, including his failure to provide financial support and excluding the wife and children from railway service benefits, contributed to the non-resumption of marital relations.

Consequently, the court ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the decree of dissolution of marriage. The judgment serves as a reminder that the grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act must be substantiated, and the concept of irretrievable breakdown of marriage cannot be invoked without proper evidence and due process.

Date of Decision: 22.12.2023

xxx vs xxx   

 

Similar News