my wife wants divorce. i am living in a village and she is from city area. As she is qualified she working in a reputed organisation.

after 10 years of marriage she starts coming home late. due to heavy workload i suggest to change job from that day she starts allegations . she says our thinking doesn’t match and now she wants divorce.

this is not a valid reason for divorce and she also not clear about reasons as she refuses to tell.

what to do

Hello Sir/Ma’am,
We are an edu-help portal. We don’t provide legal help in sensitive issues. Not even we can ‘advise’ over this matter. Very sorry for that. Please consult a professional lawyer.

Thanks And Regards,
Kailasha Online Learning LLP

my sisterr filed divorce without mutual constent

she had proof against her husband about extra matrial affair. She has chats of her husband and his girlfriend

Her husband drinks a lot and come late at home, my sis is not happy with her marriage, she is mentally disturbed in her realtion she dont want to leave in this marrrige and want to divoce.

is she can get a divorce by this proof ?

A. In the Hindu personal laws ‘cruelty’ is one of the major causes of divorce. The simple meaning of the term cruelty is cruel behavior/attitudes, brutality, savagery, inhumanity, barbarism etc. In legal field, cruelty denotes the behaviour which causes physical or mental harm to another, especially a spouse, whether intentionally or not.

Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act,1955 has provided certain grounds of divorce in which cruelty is the most common one. Every matrimonial conduct, which may cause annoyance to the other, may not amount to cruelty. Mere trivial irritations, quarrels between spouses, which happen in day-to-day married life, may also not amount to cruelty. Cruelty in matrimonial life may be of unfounded variety, which can be subtle or brutal. It may be words, gestures or by mere silence, violent or non-violent.

To constitute cruelty, the conduct complained of should be “grave and weighty” so as to come to the conclusion that the petitioner spouse cannot be reasonably expected to live with the other spouse. It must be something more serious than “ordinary wear and tear of married life”. The conduct taking into consideration the circumstances and background has to be examined to reach the conclusion whether the conduct complained of amounts to cruelty in the matrimonial law. Conduct has to be considered, as noted above, in the background of several factors such as social status of parties, their education, physical and mental conditions, customs and traditions. It is difficult to lay down a precise definition or to give exhaustive description of the circumstances, which would constitute cruelty. It must be of the type as to satisfy the conscience of the Court that the relationship between the parties had deteriorated to such extent due to the conduct of the other spouse that it would be impossible for them to live together without mental agony, torture or distress, to entitle the complaining spouse to secure divorce. Physical violence is not absolutely essential to constitute cruelty and a consistent course of conduct inflicting immeasurable mental agony and torture may well constitute cruelty. Mental cruelty may consist of verbal abuses and insults by using filthy and abusive language leading to constant disturbance of mental peace of the other party.

Some common examples of cruelty include the following:

1. physical attacks on a spouse
continuous rage, anger, screaming, or yelling at a spouse
2. constant belittling or criticizing the other spouse’s abilities, employment, or looks
3. publicly flaunting an affair or adulterous relationship
4. falsely accusing the other spouse of committing adultery
5. failing to tell the other spouse about an acquired sexually transmitted disease, while continuing to maintain sexual relations with spouse, and
6. Consistently staying away fro m the marital residence without any explanation.

For better understanding, let’s go through a case study:

Naveen Kohli Vs. Neelu Kohli [AIR 2004 All 1]
Facts:

The appellant, Naveen Kohli got married to Neelu Kohli on 20.11.1975. Three sons were born out of the wedlock of the parties.

According to the appellant, the respondent is bad tempered and a woman of rude behaviour. After marriage, she started quarrelling and misbehaving with the appellant and his parents and ultimately, the appellant was compelled to leave the parental residence and started to reside in a rented premises from May 1994.

The appellant alleged that in the month of May 1994, when he along with the respondent and their children visited Bombay to attend the golden jubilee marriage anniversary of his father-in-law, he noticed that they respondent was indulging in an indecent manner and found her in a compromising position with one Biswas Rout. Immediately thereafter, the appellant started living separately from the respondent since May 1994. The appellant suffered intense physical and mental torture.

According to the appellant, the respondent had withdrawn Rs. 9,50,000/- from the Bank Account of the appellant and deposited the same in her account. The appellant alleged that the respondent got a false first information report registered against him under Sections 420/467/468 and 471 IPC, which was registered as Case No. 156 of 1995. According to him, the respondent again got a case under Sections 323/324 I.P.C. registered in the police station Panki, Kanpur City and efforts were made to get the appellant arrested.

Husband field for divorce on grounds of ‘cruelty’, Trial Court recorded specific finding about wife harassing and torturing husband, mentally, physically and financially. Decree of dissolution of marriage passed by Trial Court marriage under Section 13, Hindu Marriage Act.

Wife appealed in High Court and HC held evidence on record not properly appreciated by Trial Court. A finding that husband immorally cohabited with another lady recorded by the High Court. On that ground held, that it amounted to misconduct and was uncondonable for the purpose of Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act and suit for divorce dismissed.
Hence, the husband is appealing in SC for the decree of divorce.

Judgement:

From the analysis and evaluation of the entire evidence, it is clear that the respondent has resolved to live in agony only to make life a miserable hell for the appellant as well. This type of adamant and callous attitude, in the context of the facts of this case, leaves no manner of doubt in our mind that the respondent is bent upon treating the appellant with mental cruelty.

The respondent against the appellant has filed number of cases including criminal complaints and every effort has been made to harass and torture him and even to put the appellant behind the bars by the respondent.

SC held that the word “cruelty” is used in Section 13(1)(i)(a) of the Act in the context of human conduct or behavior in relation to or in respect of matrimonial duties or obligations. Physical violence is not absolutely essential to constitute cruelty. A consistent course of conduct inflicting immeasurable mental agony and torture may constitute cruelty. Mental cruelty may consist of verbal abuses and insults by using filthy and abusive language leading to constant disturbance of mental peace of the other party. Hence SC set aside the judgment of the High Court and directs that the marriage between the parties should be dissolved according to the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.