Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Marriage irretrievably broken-down, Divorce granted – P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Punjab and Haryana High Court observed (in Mahdeep Singh Vs Lovleen Kaur D.D 2nd May 2022 ) while referring the case of A Jayachandra vs. Aneel Kaur, 2005 (2) SCC 22 , breaking down of marriage is not one of statutory grounds on which Court can direct dissolution of marriage, but the Court with a view to do complete justice and shorten the agony of the parties engaged in long drawn legal battle, directed in those cases dissolution of marriage.

The appellant and respondent were married in Amritsar on 6.10.2011 according to Hindu customs. There was no dowry. After marrying, the couple lived together. This marriage produced no offspring. Since the beginning of the marriage, the respondent has been unkind to the appellant and his family.

The respondent said she was forced to marry the appellant after a few days. She picked petty conflicts. She used profanity. She intimidated the appellant and his family with a bogus criminal case. On 29.10.2012, she left her husband. On 14.12.2012, she filed a police report against the appellant and his family. After pressuring the appellant and his family, she collected Rs.1,25,000/- (Rs.70,000/- via cheque and Rs.55000/- in cash) and items she brought of her own volition. In a statement dated 16.01.2013, she retracted the complaint.

Respectable helped the couple decide to seek for mutual divorce. Later, she withdrew her consent for divorce, and the petition was rejected as withdrawn on 15.02.2013. Respondent now lives with her parents. He sought for divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. But same was dismissed by the Family Court.

Aggrieved Husband/ Appellant approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court in 2017 and the parties were referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre of High Court. But the mediation has failed between the parties.

Hon’ble High Court observed that that the parties are staying separately for the last about 10 years and Court made several attempts to settle the dispute amicably between the parties but all in vain. Referred the case of Chandra Kala Trivedi vs. Dr. S.P. Trivedi, 1993 (4) SCC 232 wherein Hon'ble the Supreme Court while considering a case where marriage was irretrievably broken down and held that in this case, the decree of divorce can be granted where both the parties have levelled such allegations against each other that the marriage appears to be practically dead, and the parties cannot live together.

High Court held that the couple's marriage has ended irretrievably, and they can't live together again. Not granting divorce would be terrible for both parties. It's also undisputed. Respondent filed a complaint against appellant, and appellant was discharged on 17.10.2018 (A-1). Divorce granted however appellant directed to make an F.D of Rs.6 lacs in the name of the respondent-wife.

D.D:- 02.05.2022

Maheep Singh Vs. Loveleen Kaur

Latest Legal News