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 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 Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi High Court

Husband's 'Fault in Not Allowing Wife to Reside with Him' – Divorce Petition Dismissed – Chhattisgarh High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, in a landmark judgment, dismissed a divorce appeal filed by the appellant, Mr. Ravishankar Shrivas, against his wife, Smt. Sarita Sen. The Court observed that the husband was at 'fault in not allowing his wife to reside with him,' thereby ruling in favor of the wife.

On 25th September 2023, Hon'ble Shri Goutam Bhaduri & Hon'ble Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari, JJ delivered a judgment that has set a precedent on what constitutes valid grounds for divorce in marital disputes. The appellant/husband had initially filed for divorce on the basis of cruelty and desertion, a plea which had been dismissed by the Judge, Family Court, Janjgir on 28th June 2019. Unhappy with the decision, Mr. Shrivas approached the High Court.

The judges highlighted that Mr. Shrivas himself had 'refused to allow his wife to reside with him at the place of his posting,' and had provided no reasonable justification for doing so. The Court cited the counseling proceedings from 13th October 2010, where Mrs. Sen had expressed a desire to reside with her husband, but the appellant himself did not agree for the same.

"Admittedly, the appellant/husband himself refused to allow his wife to reside with him at the place of his posting and he has not stated any reason therefor," observed the Court. In light of these facts, the Court found that the appellant had failed to prove that he was treated with cruelty, and that the ground of desertion was also not proved.

Quoting from the Supreme Court's illustrative instances for mental cruelty in the case of Samar Ghosh Vs. Jaya Ghosh, the judges found none of the conditions met in the case at hand.

The Court hence dismissed the divorce appeal, adding that "mere assertion in the plaint that the wife is residing separately since December 2009, for any sufficient cause, is not found to be proved."

This judgment serves as a crucial reminder that both parties in a marriage have obligations and responsibilities, and one cannot easily lay blame on the other without self-examination. Legal experts predict that the ruling will influence future cases on marital disputes, particularly those involving claims of cruelty and desertion.

Date of Decision: 25.09.2023

Ravishankar Shrivas  vs Smt. Sarita Sen                

 

Latest Legal News