Abusing Husband amounts to mental cruelty and can stand as sufficient ground for divorce : Supreme Court

data-matched-content-ui-type="image_card_sidebyside" data-matched-content-rows-num="1" data-matched-content-columns-num="4"

New Delhi: The Honourable Apex judicial authority of India- Supreme Court, had ruled out saying that a Wife to her Husband when abusing uttering that he is ‘son of a Prostitute’ then the same can be treated as a Mental Cruelty, and will stand as sufficient ground for divorce.

It was observed by the Court, in the appeal case preferred by one Mr. Vinod Kumar Subbiah, against his Wife Mrs. Saraswathi Palaniappan, that the Trial Court also had examined the evidence in the case with greater length and concluded reasonably, saying that, the Actions of the Respondent- Wife Mrs. Saraswathi Palaniappan is amounted to cruelty.

Hon’ble Apex Court’s Bench comprising of Justices Vikramajit Sen and A. M. Sapre  further, pointed that if a spouse abuses the other as being born from a prostitute, then the same can not be treated as ‘Wear and Tear’ of family life.  Also summoning the police on false or flimsy grounds cannot be similarly viewed.

data-matched-content-ui-type="image_card_sidebyside" data-matched-content-rows-num="1" data-matched-content-columns-num="4"

So far as the facts of the case was concerned, it was seen that Mr. Vinod Kumar Subbiah- Husband was married to Saraswathi Palaniappan- Wife in the year 2004 and thereafter both of them went the USA. And allegedly, while the wife was staying with his at USA, she was verbally abusive, she would insult his family, she would threaten to lodge false police complaints and would threaten to commit suicide placing the blame on husband and his family. She returned to India after becoming pregnant and remind in India after the birth of her child.  Husband attempted to bring her back, however, Wife refused.

The divorce among them was granted by the Trial Court in Madurai, the Court further directed Mr. Vinod to pay to his Wife the legal expenses of Rupees 25,000. However, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras’s Madurai Bench set aside the decision of the Trial Court, and allowed the appeal of Wife. Resultantly, the present appeal was preferred by the Husband against Hon’ble High Court’s judgment.

As such, the concerned bench of honourable Supreme Court had allowed the appeal of Husband and Justice Sen specifically mentioned in the Judgment that the High Court was not justified in setting aside the conclusions arrived at by the concerned Trial Court and there were no substantive reason with the High Court to do so. Thus, the present Judgment is made to restore the decision of concerned Trial Court.

data-matched-content-ui-type="image_card_sidebyside" data-matched-content-rows-num="4" data-matched-content-columns-num="4"

by Faim Khalilkhan Pathan.