CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

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