Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
age39years,Occ:Service,R/o.Flat
No.201,SimranPlazaSociety,
Sec.44,PlotNo.144,Karave,Nerul
(W),NaviMumbai.
Versus
C
ou
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATBOMBAY
CIVILAPPELLATEJURISDICTION
SECONDAPPEALNO.869of2012
rt
Second appeal.doc
...Appellant
(originalPetitioner)
ig
h
1.AdvocateNehaRohitKhurana
Age37years,Occ:Housewife
2.Ms.RashikaRohitKhurana
Age10years,Occ:Student
3.KrishRohitKhurana,
Age5years,Occ:Student
ba
y
Nos.2and3beingMinorThrough
theirLegalGuardianMotherNo.1
AllR/oJ1203,NargisBuilding,
JalvayuDefenceEnclave,Sec20Plot
20,Kharghar,
NaviMumbai410210
...Respondents
(OriginalRespondents)
om
Mr.A.S.Khandeparkar,i/bMr.AmoghKarandikar
fortheAppellant.
Mr.NitinP.DeshpandeforRespondents.
CORAM:M.L.TAHALIYANI,J.
DATEONWHICHTHEJUDGMENTIS
RESERVED:8thMAY,2015.
DATEONWHICHTHEJUDGMENTIS
PRONOUNCED:9thJULY,2015.
megha
PageNo.1of17
Second appeal.doc
rt
ORALJUDGMENT:
C
ou
ig
h
a)WhethertheAppellateCourtseriouslyerredinignoring
theallegationsofadulterymadebytheRespondentwife,
whichcouldnotbeprovedbyherandthatmakingofsuch
allegationamountstocruelty?
b)WhethertheAppellateCourtiscorrectinignoringthe
evidence brought on record by the Appellant husband
whichrightlyprovesthattheRespondentwifehastreated
theAppellanthusbandincruelmanner?
om
ba
y
c)WhethertheAppellateCourtiscorrectinsettingaside
theDecreepassedbytheTrialCourtwhenthefindingsand
observationsrecordedbytheTrialCourtinrespectofIssue
No.1 i.e. Whether Petitioner proves that Respondent has
treated him with cruelty? and Issue No.2 i.e. Whether
petitionerisentitledfordivorcefromrespondent?hasnot
beenchallengedbytheRespondentwifeinherMemoof
AppealfiledbeforetheAppellateCourt?
d)WhethertheAppellateCourtwascorrectinsettingaside
thedecreefordivorcepassedbytheTrialCourt,whenthe
Respondent wife in the Memorandum of Appeal has not
given a single ground for challenging the said decree of
divorce. The entire appeal memo is only regarding
Alimony.
e) Whether the Appellate Court is right in coming to
conclusionthatifthepartiesledanormalsexuallifeeven
after a series of acts of cruelty by one spouse strongly
showed that the parties had condoned their grievances
whichtheyhadagainsteachother?
megha
PageNo.2of17
Second appeal.doc
2.
TheAppellanthadfiledapetitionundersection13(1)(i
rt
a)oftheHinduMarriageAct1955forgrantofdecreeofdivorceon
C
ou
the ground of cruelty. The petition was heard by Jt. Civil Judge,
SeniorDivision,PanvelandwasfinallydecidedasHMPNo.82/2008
on1722011.TheTrialCourtpassedthefollowingorder:
ig
h
1.Thepetitionispartlyallowed.
2. The marriage between the petitioner and opponent
solemnized on 28th April, 1999 at Delhi, is hereby
dissolved.
3. The prayer of possession of Flat No.J1203, JalVayu
Vihar Nargis Building, Sector 20, Plot No.20, Kharghar,
NaveMumbai,andreentryinthatflat,isdismissed.
4. Inthepeculiarcircumstancesofthispetition,noorder
astocosts.
5. Decreebedrawnupaccordingly.
TheRespondenttookupthematterinappealbeforethe
ba
y
3.
DistrictCourt,Raigad. TheappealwasheardbytheAdhocDistrict
om
JudgevideAppealNo.72of2011andwasdecidedon1872012.The
appeal was allowed and judgment and decree passed by the Trial
Courtwassetaside. TheAppellant(originalPetitioner)hasmoved
thisCourtbywayofthepresentsecondappeal.
4.
BeforeIdealwiththelawpointsframedbythisCourtitis
necessary to state the facts in brief that gave rise to the divorce
petitionandtheevidenceofboththeparties. TheAppellantRohit
andRespondentNehagotmarriedon2841999.Afterthemarriage
megha
PageNo.3of17
Second appeal.doc
theylivedtogetheratmatrimonialhomeatDelhi.Shehaddelivered
rt
twochildrenoutofthesaidwedlock.Oneon682000andanother
5.
C
ou
on1022006.
ItwasallegedbytheAppellantbeforetheTrialCourtthat
theRespondentNo.1wasinhabitofattendinglatenightpartiesin
ig
h
Delhi.SheusedtoignoretheadvicegivenbythePetitionerandused
tocreate scenes, if preventedfromherattendingtheparties. It is
allegedthattheRespondentNo.1isveryshorttemperedandshehas
norespectformarriageandthefamilyofthePetitioner.Sheusedto
becomeaggressiveandabusivefrequently.Fewoftheincidentshave
ba
y
beenmentionedbythePetitionerinpara3ofthepetitionindicating
thatRespondentNo.1wasofabusivenatureandshewasveryshort
om
tempered.
6.
PageNo.4of17
Second appeal.doc
duetomisconductonthepartofRespondentNo.1.Itisallegedthat
rt
RespondentNo.1haddemandedUS$3000forspendingtopurchase
C
ou
giftsforhermotherwhentheshiphadreachedUkrain. Evenafter
returningtoIndiashehadbeenspendingmostofhertimewithher
motherathermother'shouse.ItisfurtherallegedthattheAppellant
hadtoleavehisexaminationatCalcuttaasRespondentNo.1insisted
ig
h
thatheshouldcomeimmediatelyafterdeliveryofafemalechildon6
82000.TheAppellanttherefore,rushedbacktoDelhi.However,he
wasnottreatedwellintheHospitalbytheRespondentNo.1andher
mother. ItisallegedthatRespondentNo.1andhermotherwanted
ba
y
om
househewenttoKolkatatoattendremainingMastersexamination.
However,whenhereturnedtoDelhihefoundthatRespondentNo.1
wasathermother'shouse. TheAppellantwenttheretobringher
back to their house at Vikaspuri, Delhi. At that time also he was
humiliatedandnottreatedwellbyRespondentNo.1andhermother.
It is alleged that on one occasion she even went to the extent of
tearingherclothesastheAppellantwasintendingtoshiftbackhis
parents'house. ItisstatedthatRespondentNo.1hadapologisedfor
megha
PageNo.5of17
Second appeal.doc
rt
AppellantdecidedtohaveafreshmarriedlifewithRespondentNo.1.
C
ou
However,withinaveryshorttimeshestartedcreatingscenesinthe
house.
7.
ig
h
2014. TheAppellantandRespondentstartedlivingtogetherinthe
saidhouse. However,changeinthenatureofRespondentNo.1did
ba
y
not last longer and she started attending late night parties on the
pretextthatshehadtomeetherclientstilllateintheevening. She
om
alsoneglectedherchildrenduetoherextravagantbehaviour. Itis
alleged that in the month of December2005 mother of the
RespondentstartedstayingatKhargharandshestartedinterferingin
theinternalaffairsoftheAppellantandRespondentNo.1.Thereused
to be frequent misdemeanors on the part of Respondent No.1.
Respondent No.1 started sleeping with her mother. The Appellant
allegesthathewasalone.Hewasdeprivedoffoodalso.Respondent
No.1 and her mother used to leave house for long hours in the
megha
PageNo.6of17
Second appeal.doc
absenceoftheAppellantandwerenotavailablewhenthePetitioner
rt
wasreturninghome.On622006shehadaquarrelwithparentsof
C
ou
the Appellant and she had crossed all the limits of decency and
ultimatelyhitfatheroftheAppellantandbrokehisspectacles. The
Appellantwasrequiredtomakeseparatearrangementforhisparents.
Because of continuous alleged mental torture on the part of
ig
h
RespondentNo.1,theAppellantsufferedfromseveredepressionand
hewasadvisedcompletebedrest.Fewmoreincidentsofthisnature
havealsobeenstatedintheappealtodemonstratethatRespondent
No.1 had treated the Appellant with extreme cruelty and he was
8.
ba
y
entitledfordecreeofdivorceonthegroundcruelty.
The Appellant had lateron taken up the job in another
om
company.ItisallegedthattheAppellantwasremovedfromthehouse
forciblybyRespondentNo.1.RespondentNo.1hadalsobeenvisiting
officeoftheAppellantandusedtocreatescenesintheoffice.
9.
PageNo.7of17
Second appeal.doc
LearnedTrialCourtframedthefollowingissuesandgave
rt
10.
under:
Findings
In the affirmative
In the affirmative
ig
h
Issues
LearnedTrialCourtfoundtheevidenceoftheAppellant
11.
C
ou
findingrecordedagainstthesaidissueswhichcanbereproducedas
reliableandhealsofoundtheallegationsmadebyRespondentNo.1
ba
y
om
orderoftheTrialJudgehasalreadybeenreproducedhereinabove.
12.
megha
Points
Findings
In the negative.
In the negative.
PageNo.8of17
Second appeal.doc
In the Affirmative.
4. What order
Appeal is allowed.
C
ou
13.
rt
Beforeproceedingfurtheritisnecessarytobenotedhere
ig
h
submittedintheTrialCourtbywayofexaminationinchiefappeared
tohavebeenpreparedbythepartiesthemselvesandtherefore,they
ba
y
wasonlyfullofsuggestionsandtherefore,thelearnedTrialJudgehas
givenfindingthattheevidencegivenbythePetitionerbeforetheTrial
Judgehadremainedunchallenged. TheAppellateCourtinmyview
om
hadtakencorrectviewofthematterandhasstatedthattheCourt
shouldhavetakenintoaccounttheentireevidenceandconductofthe
PageNo.9of17
Second appeal.doc
rt
lateronitturnedoutthathewasclassmateofRespondentNo.1.He
C
ou
ig
h
alsocomeinhisevidencethathersistergotmarriedtoherownRakhi
brother and lateron settled in USA to avoid social embarrassment.
14.
Thisportionofevidencefoundtobeirrelevanttotheproceeding.
Inmyopinion,learnedAppellateCourthastakenaright
ba
y
noteoftheirrelevantportionoftheevidence.ThelearnedAppellate
Court has also stated that above said alleged background of
om
RespondentNo.1wasrepeatedbytheAppellantatmanyplacesinthe
evidence. Thathasresultedintounnecessarilylengthyexamination
megha
PageNo.10of17
Second appeal.doc
becausethereisnocorroboration.Itistobenotedthatcorroboration
rt
isnotarule.However,inthecircumstancesofthecasetheevidence
C
ou
hasbecomedoubtfulwithoutcorroboration. Thereisnoincidental
ig
h
15.
toindicateRespondentNo.1tostopbutshedidnotlistenanddrove
away the Car. This evidence is neither corroborated by any direct
ba
y
evidenceorcircumstantialevidence. Thereisnoevidencethatthe
Appellant had ever questioned this behaviour of Respondent No.1
om
afterherarrivalathome.
16.
TheAppellantfurtherallegesthatmotherofRespondent
PageNo.11of17
Second appeal.doc
rt
RespondentNo.1mighthaveintervenedinthesituation. However,
C
ou
thatdoesnotleadtoaconclusionthatthemotherofRespondentNo.1
wasagainsttheAppellantandshewantedtocreateanyripplesinthe
marriedlifeoftheAppellantandRespondentNo.1.Onthecontrary
there was no reason for mother of Respondent No.1 to create a
17.
ig
h
situationwhereherowndaughter'slifewillbeinperil.
The Appellant further states that his father was once
ba
y
fromhisownhouse.Thisevidencecouldhavebeensupportedbythe
evidence of father or mother of the Appellant. No reasonable
om
explanationisgivenastowhythefatherormotheroftheAppellant
couldnotdeposedinsupportofevidenceoftheirownson.TheCourt
hadnotedthatboththeparentsoftheAppellanthadbeenattending
thisCourtthroughoutthehearingofthepresentSecondAppeal. In
thecircumstancesitwasexpectedthateitherfatherormothercould
havegivenevidenceinsupportoftheevidenceoftheAppellant.
megha
PageNo.12of17
Second appeal.doc
18.
rt
regardtoherbehaviourintheofficeoftheAppellant.Itisstatedby
C
ou
theAppellantinhisevidencethatRespondentNo.1frequentlyvisited
hisofficeandcreatedscenesintheoffice.Thisevidenceissupported
byoneofthecolleaguesoftheAppellant.Eveniftheevidencewith
regardtotheallegedscenecreatedintheofficeisbelieved,itdoesnot
ig
h
No.1wasinterestedtoknowtheincomeoftheAppellantsothatshe
canclaimappropriatemaintenancefromhimintheproceedingsfiled
ba
y
om
and the present petition for divorce was filed by the Appellant.
Therefore,itispossiblethatRespondentNo.1mighthavemisbehaved
intheofficebuttheintentionwasnottobecruelwiththeAppellant
buttogetthefigureofrealincomeoftheAppellant,sothatshecould
beinapositiontoclaimpropermaintenance.
megha
PageNo.13of17
Second appeal.doc
19.
Apartfromthis,therearelotofstrayincidentsmentioned
rt
bytheAppellantinhisevidencetodemonstratethathewassubjected
C
ou
tocruelty.Ihaveexaminedallthestrayincidents.Suchincidents,in
myopinion,takeplaceinmanyofthefamilies. Onlythingisthat
sincethemarriagebetweentheAppellantandRespondentNo.1was
20.
ig
h
disturbed,thefrequencyofincidentscouldbemore.
habitofattendinglatenightparties.Butthereisnoevidencetocome
ba
y
time.Socialisingtosomeextentinthepresentsocietyispermissible.
InthisregarditmaybenotedherethatRespondentNo.1hasalso
om
givenevidencethattheAppellantwasoncefoundinacompanyof
female friend, who was extremely drunk and she was brought at
megha
PageNo.14of17
Second appeal.doc
rt
21.
C
ou
ig
h
theappeal.Sufficeistosaythatevenifearlierconductistakeninto
consideration, element of mental or physical cruelty is not proved
ba
y
om
examined.
22.
Nowletmedealwiththelawpointsonebyoneonthe
basisofwhich,thesecondappealhasbeenadmittedbythisCourt.
Pointoneiswithregardtotheallegationofadulterymadeagainstthe
AppellantbyRespondentNo.1.Inthisregarditmaybenotedthatthe
AppellanthadalsomadesimilarallegationsagainstRespondentNo.1,
whichhavebeendiscussedbythisCourtatparaNos.13and15ofthe
megha
PageNo.15of17
Second appeal.doc
23.
C
ou
toincorrectconclusionthattherewasnomentalcruelty.
rt
Courthasignoredtheallegationofadulteryandhastherefore,come
SecondpointisthatthefirstappellateCourtignoredthe
ig
h
appellatecourtwouldclearlyindicatethatthesecondappellatecourt
has taken objective view of the matter and has come to the right
conclusion. Ihavegivenlittlemoredetailsofthejudgmentoffirst
ba
y
appellatecourtintheearlierparagraphsofthisjudgment.
24.
ThirdpointraisedbytheAppellantisthattherewasno
prayerforsettingasidethedecreeofdivorce.Thisisnotcorrectinas
om
muchasthefirstappealwasfiledtochallengethewholejudgmentof
thetrialcourt.
25.
Fourthpointinfactmergesintothethirdpointanddoes
notrequireanyseparateanswer.
26.
Asfarasfifthpointisconcerneditmaybestatedherethat
theAppellantandRespondentNo.1livedreasonablynormallifeafter
megha
PageNo.16of17
Second appeal.doc
rt
C
ou
counterallegations.IfonegoesthroughtheevidenceoftheAppellant
andRespondentNo.1recordedbytheTrialCourt,itwilldemonstrate
that equally serious allegations have been made by the Appellant
againstRespondentNo.1. Theallegationonthebasisofwhichthe
ig
h
Appellantclaimsthathewassubjectedtocrueltybyhiswife,have
beenmadebytheAppellantalsoagainsthiswifeRespondentNo.1.It
therefore,appearsthatbothofthemwereinhabitofsocialisingandit
ispossiblethattheymisunderstoodeachother.Thereisnoconcrete
ba
y
evidencethattheAppellantwastreatedwithcrueltybyRespondent
No.1andtherefore,heisnotentitledforadecreeofdivorceonthe
om
groundofcruelty.
27.
secondappealistherefore,dismissed.Noorderastocosts.
(JUDGE)
megha
PageNo.17of17