Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.16 seconds)Smt. Sulochana vs Ram Kumar Chauhan on 28 November, 1980
And if the husband wants to have divorce on the ground of cruelty by the wife he must specifically and clearly state in what way the wife treated him with cruelty see-Smt. Sulochana v. Ram Kumar Chauhan . Therefore I am clearly of the view that there is no pleading by the husband that the wife denied or refused sexual intercourse. Even in the notice Ex.A-2 sent by him earlier to the petition no complaint of denial or refusal of sexual intercourse by the wife has been made. In the evidence also the petitioner has stated in chief examination that he filed the petition on the ground of desertion. He has not uttered anything about cruelty. In spite of this position the Courts below proceeded on the footing that it is the case of the petitioner-husband that the wife denied sexual intercourse. Therefore the finding of the Courts below that there was denial of sexual intercourse by the wife cannot be sustained.
Srikant Rangacharya Adya vs Anuradha on 17 July, 1979
In this connection the learned Counsel has cited the decisions in Dr. Srikant Rangacharya Adya v. Smt. Anuradha and G. Ramakrishna Pillazi v. J. Vijayakumari Amma . But in, our case no specific abandonment of marital duties has been alleged for the relief of divorce on the ground of desertion apart from the allegation that she left the house of the husband. As seen above the only allegation made against the wife is that she told the husband in the first night that the marriage was forced on her and he believed what ail she said but he however thought that in coarse of time she would reconcile to the marriage. No other overt act has been pleaded. This being the case no desertion can be said to have been made out as the learned Counsel would submit. Further we have held above that there is no proof of the husband's allegation of cruelty to him by the wife. On the other hand it is the case of the wife that the husband has heaped many false allegations against her morality. He has alleged that she had been living with one Padmanabhan before marriage for ten years having everything with him and he has also made a disguised allegation that she had already a child born to her and that child is in Andhra Pradesh and she wanted to adopt that child. None of these has been proved. When the husband has made such wild accusations against the wife and she because of these wanted to go to the house of her parents, can she be said to have deserted the husband? Thus as rightly held by both the courts below there is no desertion by the wife.
G. Ramakrishna Pillai vs J. Vijayakumari Amma And Ors. on 21 June, 1989
In this connection the learned Counsel has cited the decisions in Dr. Srikant Rangacharya Adya v. Smt. Anuradha and G. Ramakrishna Pillazi v. J. Vijayakumari Amma . But in, our case no specific abandonment of marital duties has been alleged for the relief of divorce on the ground of desertion apart from the allegation that she left the house of the husband. As seen above the only allegation made against the wife is that she told the husband in the first night that the marriage was forced on her and he believed what ail she said but he however thought that in coarse of time she would reconcile to the marriage. No other overt act has been pleaded. This being the case no desertion can be said to have been made out as the learned Counsel would submit. Further we have held above that there is no proof of the husband's allegation of cruelty to him by the wife. On the other hand it is the case of the wife that the husband has heaped many false allegations against her morality. He has alleged that she had been living with one Padmanabhan before marriage for ten years having everything with him and he has also made a disguised allegation that she had already a child born to her and that child is in Andhra Pradesh and she wanted to adopt that child. None of these has been proved. When the husband has made such wild accusations against the wife and she because of these wanted to go to the house of her parents, can she be said to have deserted the husband? Thus as rightly held by both the courts below there is no desertion by the wife.
Smt. Saroj Rani vs Sudarshan Kumar Chadha on 8 August, 1984
This the Supreme Court has stated in the context of wife seeking in the Supreme Court permission to amend the pleading alleging that the husband had deceived her into filing a petition for conjugal rights. The facts in that case are different from the facts in our case and therefore the above observation made by the Supreme Court cannot be made applicable to this case. Thus I do not find any justification for the Courts below to grant a decree for judicial separation to the husband.
Section 13A in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [Entire Act]
1