“A Hindu marriage is a sacrament and not just a social contract where one partner abandons the other without reason or just cause or existing or valid circumstance necessitating that conduct, the sacrament loses its soul and spirit, though it may continue to hold its external form and body.”
Allahabad High Court: In an appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the judgment and order of the Family Court which dissolved the marriage between the parties under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the division bench of Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Donadi Ramesh upheld the divorce decree issued by the lower court. However, regarding the issue of permanent alimony, the Court noted that the lower court had not addressed it. Consequently, the High Court has set the amount for permanent alimony at ₹5,00,000, to be paid within three months from the date of this order.
Background:
The couple’s marriage took place in 1989, and they had a child in 1991. After a few years, they first separated but then reunited in 1999 after reaching a settlement. They lived together for a while but separated again on 11-11-1999. They reached another settlement and lived together from 21-03-2001, but their relationship fell apart again, and they have been separated since then.
The husband initially filed for divorce, but the case was withdrawn in 1995 due to a settlement. He later sought restitution of conjugal rights, but this was also withdrawn because the wife expressed a refusal to live with him in separate legal proceedings under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.
The husband claimed that the wife had been cruel from the beginning, and this mistreatment contributed to his mother’s suicide by poisoning.
Analysis and Decision:
The Court noted that cruelty isn’t specifically defined by law. It referred to various Supreme Court decisions and explained that “cruelty” can mean different things based on individual behavior within a marriage and its impact on the other spouse.
The Court said that completely denying your spouse’s company without a good reason could be seen as cruelty. It’s not just about physical closeness or living together; being in a marriage means sharing time and enjoying each other’s company. If one spouse deliberately refuses to do this without any valid reason, it might be considered cruel from the perspective of the other spouse.
The Court said that completely cutting off emotional and social connection in a Hindu marriage can be seen as cruelty. This can affect the spouse who is left without any companionship.
In this case, the wife consistently refused to be with the husband and made it clear in other proceedings that she did not want to continue their marriage. Even though desertion was not mentioned as a reason for divorce, it was evident that she had no intention of living with the husband again. Her refusal to renew the relationship, lasting over 23 years without a good reason, was considered cruel.
The Court agreed with the divorce decision but noted that the lower court had not addressed the issue of permanent alimony. The Court decided that the wife should receive ₹5,00,000 in alimony, to be paid within three months. If this amount is not paid on time, it will accrue 8% interest from the end of the three-month period or from when the order is known, until it is fully paid.