Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High 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   

 

Latest Legal News