"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

Wife's Insistence on Separating Husband from Parents Without Reason is Cruelty-Calcutta HC

03 September 2024 9:46 AM

By: Admin


The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is common for Indian sons to reside with their parents even after marriage, and that a wife must have a justifiable reason for separating her husband from his parents. Justices Soumen Sen and Uday Kumar made the decision while hearing a plea from a woman challenging a court order that granted her husband a divorce on grounds of cruelty.

The court noted that there were unjustifiable reasons for the wife's attempt to separate her husband from his family. It cited instances of ego clashes over petty domestic issues and challenges related to fulfilling financial requirements.

The husband had moved out of his parents' house and into a rented one for the sake of his matrimonial peace, and the court noted that the wife's persistent efforts to separate him from his family would be torturous for him.

The bench further stated that a son's duty towards his parents is sacred and that it is customary for Indian families to live together. The court emphasized that a wife cannot demand that her husband break away from his parents without a valid reason.

In dismissing the wife's plea, the court upheld the importance of family ties and recognized the cultural significance of multi-generational living in India.

The ruling reinforces the notion that marriage does not mean severing ties with one's parents and upholds the traditional values of Indian families.

JHARNA MANDAL Vs. PRASHANT KUMAR MANDAL

Similar News