Sexual Abstinence Valid Ground for Divorce : Supreme Court

...ba href=/schizophrenia/a/b and was incapable of performing his matrimonial obligations.

She had submitted that her marriage lasted only for five months and that from the first day itself, her mother-in-law treated her cruelly, both mentally and physically, because of her husband's mental disorder.

The lower court and Delhi High Court had dismissed her petition holding that her husband was not suffering from ba href=/schizophrenia/a/b and that there was insufficient material on record to establish the cause of cruelty.

The courts had held that the incidents of cruelty were not as grave so as to be included within the scope of concept of cruelty.

Setting aside the verdict of trial court and High Court, the Bench said "the trial court failed to appreciate the uncontroverted evidence of the appellant (woman) who had proved the case on every count.

"It has been established beyond doubt by the doctors who had deposed as witnesses and brought original medical record of the respondent (husband) that he is suffering from mental disorder." Holding that grant of divorce on the plea of mental insanity and mental disorder is different than cruelty, the Bench said "the appellant (woman), in our view, had proved beyond doubt that the respondent (husband) suffered from mental disorder and that the appellant suffered cruelty by and at the behest of the husband".

Printer Friendly Format Email this Article Email your Comment on the News Article News Title Sexual Abstinence Valid Ground for Divorce : Supr...

Non-consummation of marriage a ground for divorce: apex court

...ba href=/schizophrenia/a/b and the marriage was not consummated.

He was not in a position to perform his matrimonial obligations.

According to her, her mother-in-law drove her out after five months and she was not permitted to return again.

Ms.

Saxena filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 (1)(1-a) and (iii) of the HMA on the ground of cruelty as well mental disorder.

Both the trial court and the Delhi High Court rejected her plea.

Miscarriage of justice Allowing her appeal, the Supreme Court held that their orders resulted in a grave miscarriage of justice to the woman, who had been constrained to live with a dead relationship for over 13 years.

This was a fit case for freeing her from the shackles of the respondent-husband and let her live her own life as a human being.

Printer friendly page Send this article to Friends by E-Mail National News: Front Page News Update Stories in this Section Lawyers, doctors to be brought under service tax net: Minister Rajya Sabha expels Sakshi Maharaj BJP suspends Sangh Priya Gautam New party on April 30, says Uma Bharti Assam pays homage to Bhrigu Phukan EC can make only preliminary enquiry: Sezhiyan Majuli voters seek protection from floods WHO puts China ahead of India in incidence of diabetes ``UPA po...

Abstinence from sex is ground for divorce: SC

...ba href=/schizophrenia/a/b and was incapable of performing his matrimonial obligations.She had submitted that her marriage lasted only for five months and that from the first day itself her mother-in-law treated her cruelly, both mentally and physically, because of her husband’s mental disorder.The lower court and Delhi High Court had dismissed her petition holding that her husband was not suffering from ba href=/schizophrenia/a/b and that there was insufficient material on record to establish the cause of cruelty.

The courts had held that the incidents of cruelty were not as grave so as to be included within the scope of concept of cruelty.Setting aside the verdict of trial court and High Court, the Bench said, “the trial court failed to appreciate the uncontroverted evidence of the appellant (woman) who had proved the case on every count.”“It has been established beyond doubt by the doctors who had deposed as witnesses and brought original medical record of the respondent (husband) that he is suffering from mental disorder.”Holding that grant of divorce on the plea of mental insanity and mental disorder is different than cruelty, the Bench said “the appellant (woman), in our view, had proved beyond doubt that the respondent (husband) suffered from mental disorder and that the appellant suffered cruelty by and at the behest of the husband.” » login to post comments Search Pic of the Day The people gathered at the chinchinim church for the funeral of Fr.

Eusebio FerraoMore...

Poll ...

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | All news